# James Cameron's "Avatar"



## ZeroSignal

I think this looks absolutely stunning and I personally can't wait. 

EDIT: Also, the music gets me every time.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

yeah looks good, I've been waiting for this film for some time.

considered starting a thread on it myself a while ago but I decided against it for some reason.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> yeah looks good, I've been waiting for this film for some time.
> 
> considered starting a thread on it myself a while ago but I decided against it for some reason.



It's my thread now, Dave! 

I think the character design is truly stunning. The amount of effort that went into them is something else.


----------



## Arminius

Wow, looks like this could be an awesome movie, especially the cool 3d stuff


----------



## ZeroSignal

Apparently they're making a video game based on this too and the director is directly involved in it so I don't think it'd be totally rubbish.


----------



## vampiregenocide

Looks good, and it should do considering it cost $400 million to make.

Hope for their sake it actually makes a profit. Looks promising though, I love the vibrancy and style of it.


----------



## phaeded0ut

vampiregenocide said:


> Looks good, and it should do considering it cost $400 million to make.
> 
> Hope for their sake it actually makes a profit. Looks promising though, I love the vibrancy and style of it.



I think I just felt my stomach do a complete double flip when I saw that price tag! Ouch. 

Have to agree, just saw the trailer for it in front of "Inglorious Basterds" (which was a really fun movie) and loved the visuals of it, though the audio was a little distorted.


----------



## Pauly

That figure is speculation, most people were saying $200-250 million. Honestly, it looks like shit on a computer screen compared to seeing it (the preview) at the IMAX with the 3d glasses. It's really like no other 3d film I've ever seen, it's like you're in the holodeck or some shit rather than being a cheap gimmick. The story however makes me think of 'Dances with Wolves....in space!' but it's Cameron so I haz faith.

If you dont' see it a) at an IMAX cinema with a huge screen b) in 3d you're REALLY missing out. Roll on December.


----------



## synrgy

When I first heard about this, all I could think was "Oh, so THAT'S why they removed the word 'Avatar' from The Last Airbender movie's title.."


----------



## EDG3CRUSHER

vampiregenocide said:


> Looks good, and it should do considering it cost $400 million to make.
> 
> Hope for their sake it actually makes a profit. Looks promising though, I love the vibrancy and style of it.



Actually, it was only $237 million. Which still makes it the fourth most expensive (with the latest POTC being the most expensive at 300). The number 400 got tossed around when the technology was not available as an estimation.

Still a lot of money either way.


----------



## vampiregenocide

Ah my bad, thats not quite such a crazy budget.


----------



## Pauly

Bump. I think high res shots like this put to bed any idea this film will 'looks like a cartoon.'


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Yeah, this film is supposedly meant to have the most advanced CGI to date, the original estimated budget for the film was $400 million, which would've made it the most expensive film ever made


----------



## -mouse-

this shit trips me out... I wanna see this movie when it comes out


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Just did some research, the film's budget is $294 million, making it the second most expensive film ever made, with Pirates of the Carribean: At World's End being the first at $300 million.

So we know it has a ridiculously large budget, but as we know highest budget =/= best film, as POTC: AWE is largely considered a flop, so will this film deliver?


----------



## Pauly

I dread to think how long a single frame takes to render, over a day probably. Good thing someone invented render farms! I remember going to a Weta Digital thing and the guy saying that if they'd rendered all the CG stuff out on 1 computer it would have taken 10,000 years or something crazy.


----------



## Ibanezsam4

Scar Symmetry said:


> Just did some research, the film's budget is $294 million, making it the second most expensive film ever made, with Pirates of the Carribean: At World's End being the first at $300 million.
> 
> So we know it has a ridiculously large budget, but as we know highest budget =/= best film, as POTC: AWE is largely considered a flop, so will this film deliver?



yeah i thought that movie sucked balls.. however the shot of the admiral walking down the deck while his ship is exploding around him was pretty damn cool.. 

this movie looks much better, maybe i'll finally see a film that combines a smart original story with ball busting special effects


----------



## pink freud

Scar Symmetry said:


> Yeah, this film is supposedly meant to have the most advanced CGI to date,



I hope so. Remember the Final Fantasy movie? That CGI was epic for the time (and arguably still is), and after that it seems if anything, CGI went downhill.

I have to wonder if Roger Dean was involved in the design process at all.


----------



## mattofvengeance

pink freud said:


> I hope so. Remember the Final Fantasy movie? That CGI was epic for the time (and arguably still is), and after that it seems if anything, CGI went downhill.
> 
> I have to wonder if Roger Dean was involved in the design process at all.



Not that I've heard, but the artwork in the film is definitely reminiscent of his work.


----------



## Pauly

I HAZ TICKETS!!!!!!!!

I dunno about anywhere else but the London IMAX started booking at just gone midnight. Want tix? HURRY!


----------



## samurai7drew

this movie is going to be INSANE. 

Trailers & Clips: Avatar - Exclusive Featurette: Human Hardware


----------



## Xiphos68

I was discussing this movie with my friends today and one of them said " the story line sucks. " So what it is this movie about?


----------



## samurai7drew

From Wikipedia:



The storys protagonist, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), is a former U.S. Marine who was wounded and paralyzed from the waist down in combat on Earth. Jake is selected to participate in the Avatar program, which will enable him to walk. Jake travels to Pandora, a lush jungle-covered extraterrestrial moon filled with incredible life forms, some beautiful, many terrifying. Pandora is also home to the Navi, a sentient humanoid race, who are considered primitive, yet are more physically capable than humans. Standing three meters tall (approximately 10 feet), with tails and sparkling blue skin, the Navi live in harmony with their unspoiled world. As humans encroach deeper into Pandora's forests in search of valuable minerals, the Navi unleash their formidable warrior abilities to defend their threatened existence.


Jake has unwittingly been recruited to become part of this encroachment. Since humans are unable to breathe the air on Pandora, they have created genetically-bred human-Navi hybrids known as Avatars. On Pandora, through his Avatar body, Jake will be able to walk again. Sent deep into Pandora's jungles as a scout for the soldiers that will follow, Jake encounters many of Pandora's beauties and dangers. There he meets a young Navi female, Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña).


Over time, Jake integrates himself into the Na'vi clan, and begins to fall in love with Neytiri. As a result, Jake finds himself caught between the military-industrial forces of Earth and the Navi, forcing him to choose sides in an epic battle that will decide the fate of earth and the Na'vi.




seems pretty cool to me.


----------



## zindrome

Very much looking forward to this!!
My current animation teacher worked on some of the characters while he was at Weta. SOOO JEALous!!


----------



## Xiphos68

samurai7drew said:


> From Wikipedia:
> 
> 
> 
> The storys protagonist, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), is a former U.S. Marine who was wounded and paralyzed from the waist down in combat on Earth. Jake is selected to participate in the Avatar program, which will enable him to walk. Jake travels to Pandora, a lush jungle-covered extraterrestrial moon filled with incredible life forms, some beautiful, many terrifying. Pandora is also home to the Navi, a sentient humanoid race, who are considered primitive, yet are more physically capable than humans. Standing three meters tall (approximately 10 feet), with tails and sparkling blue skin, the Navi live in harmony with their unspoiled world. As humans encroach deeper into Pandora's forests in search of valuable minerals, the Navi unleash their formidable warrior abilities to defend their threatened existence.
> 
> 
> Jake has unwittingly been recruited to become part of this encroachment. Since humans are unable to breathe the air on Pandora, they have created genetically-bred human-Navi hybrids known as Avatars. On Pandora, through his Avatar body, Jake will be able to walk again. Sent deep into Pandora's jungles as a scout for the soldiers that will follow, Jake encounters many of Pandora's beauties and dangers. There he meets a young Navi female, Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña).
> 
> 
> Over time, Jake integrates himself into the Na'vi clan, and begins to fall in love with Neytiri. As a result, Jake finds himself caught between the military-industrial forces of Earth and the Navi, forcing him to choose sides in an epic battle that will decide the fate of earth and the Na'vi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seems pretty cool to me.


----------



## sol niger 333

The night gameplay looks like something out of an acid trip. Vibrant looking game.


----------



## MickD7

cameron to me is a brilliant director. he has made some ok films i.e titanic and true lies and then he has given birth to terminator and terminator 2 which are classics and the cgi in t2 still stuns people to this day along with the concepts behind the two films. titanic was ok at best but the visuals and attention to detail were intense. I just got dragged to that shit heap twilight new moon with my girlfriend and the avatar preview made my day. this film will be insane. It really will. I am heading to get my tickets later this week or next and have been excited about this film since i heard about it.


----------



## silentrage

Sounds pretty damn cool, maybe it'll be a precursor to what battle angel will look like?


----------



## Pauly

Tue Lies is a quality film!

Also once again, I HAVE IMAX TICKETS!!!1


----------



## sakeido

god I am so psyched for this movie words fail to describe just how pumped I am for it


----------



## ZeroSignal

Extended HD trailer.


----------



## phaeded0ut

Looks very pretty. Would love to know what software they're using for this beastie, the colours, shading and particle effects are damn impressive. Looks like there aren't enough entities to be Massive.


----------



## phaeded0ut

My favorite lady, Michelle Rodriguez, from the first Resident Evil movie is in this, too. Hope that Sigourney Weaver is given more of a part in this movie, than she's been getting in the last few she's been in.

Totally off-topic, "the Machete" fake trailer from the grindhouse Tarantino film is actually going to be a real movie, getting released in 2010!!!


----------



## BigBaldIan

Seeing it on the 16th in 3D (preview screening) then again in 3D on the 18th (two lots of friends going on different days). Luckily my other half is not a typical Twilight or chick-flick type person  (she studied environmental science and has a thing for any funky alien species). She was sold by the time the Banshee and Thantor came up in the trailer.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

The closest IMAX to me is 5 hours away


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I'm interested to see if this film actually meets the hype or if it's just yet again another waste of £8 and 3 hours of my time.


----------



## Daemoniac

I have to say, i'm honestly not even remotely interested in seeing it  I've heard the hype and all that, but really, the character design and just generally the movie really doesn't seem all that great to me 

EDIT: I've also been talked at by many, many people asking me what's wrong with me


----------



## Scar Symmetry

No, I can understand that. I'm still trying to figure out why we're supposed to care about these blue Navi things.


----------



## Daemoniac

Scar Symmetry said:


> No, I can understand that. I'm still trying to figure out why we're supposed to care about these blue Navi things.




I think we are meant to... But hey, whatever


----------



## silentrage

It's an analogy to industrial civilization. We expand to a new area to extract natural resources, if the locals object we try to woo them, if that fails we kill them.

That's what it looks like to me, but trailers can be misleading so who knows.


----------



## Daemoniac

^ If that's it, then i am completely baffled at all the hype... I mean i'm baffled anyway, but really...


----------



## Ben.Last

I absolutely love James Cameron's films and I think this is going to be great but I anticipate it underperforming by a large margin. I just think it's going to be too much "hard sci fi" for the general public.


----------



## silentrage

Hard to sell eh? Compared to this story he tried to sell us in 1984? 
"A super intelligent computer starts a war against humanity and tries to wipe it out with nuclear weapons and killer robots, then after meeting heavy resistance tries to send a robot back in time to assassinate the mother of the would-be future leader of human rebels, John Connor, so he would never be born; meanwhile the rebels sends back a man to try to stop the killer robot."

People have gotten dumber in the past 25 years though so I guess I kinda see your point.


----------



## phaeded0ut

pink freud said:


> I hope so. Remember the Final Fantasy movie? That CGI was epic for the time (and arguably still is), and after that it seems if anything, CGI went downhill.
> 
> I have to wonder if Roger Dean was involved in the design process at all.



Pardon the tangent... Final Fantasy Advent Children (the first release) was done using White graphics engine for all of the work outside of fight scenes which were all frame-by-frame "hand" rendered, because the graphics engine couldn't produce the results the director wanted. A few years later with the Blue-Ray release, and now using Crystal Tools game engine, they've been able to redo everything using the game engine by itself. A little something to think about with FF XIII FINAL FANTASY XIII | SQUARE ENIX coming out (it uses the same game engine). 

Getting back on topic, gotta say that this movie looks prettier and prettier with each new trailer/teaser that comes out. Though I'm rather amazed that instead of using mass drivers from orbit or some form of neurotoxin or sleep agent (I know, I know, it kills the story) they decide to go down in updated helicopters and engage hostiles with conventional weaponry on the ground...

There's probably something more to the why's and wherefore's on why they're doing the infiltration thing vs. removal.


----------



## synrgy

I have to say, the more I see and hear about this, the less interested I become in it.

Before I saw a single trailer, I heard "James Cameron doing a sci fi flick?' and thought 'sign me up!!'.

Now, I can't help but think that not only am I going to skip it, but the chances of this TANKING at the box office seem to be increasing exponentially with each trailer and/or plot reveal.

I think homeboy spent a decade or so too long obsessing over the Titanic. (Not talking about the feature film, but the string of related documentaries he did afterwards..)


----------



## phaeded0ut

synrgy said:


> I think homeboy spent a decade or so too long obsessing over the Titanic. (Not talking about the feature film, but the string of related documentaries he did afterwards..)



LOL! His film was one of the worst I've ever had to sit through due to the wishes of my girlfriend at the time. This was also my main hesitation for seeing this film. Sadly, as you can tell, I'm mainly going for the technicals within this movie. My hope is that the editors, audio engineers and the software/hardware being used to generate the 3D effects aren't as jarring or stomach-wrenching as quite a few out there. Really would love to know what they were using for the CG work.

Many kudos to him for spending a bit of his budget on newer technologies. The cameras that he used for this film look like they're really happening from quite a number of standpoints. Didn't realize that there weren't displays that would allow the director to see both CGE's at the same time as the real elements being filmed. 

Wonder if these new cameras are split into three sections (Green, Red, Blue) or used in three's? Not sure if that is still being done for stills.


----------



## ZeroSignal

phaeded0ut said:


> Wonder if these new cameras are split into three sections (Green, Red, Blue) or used in three's? Not sure if that is still being done for stills.



I heard that they used stereoscopic cameras to record everything to give an even greater representation of the three-dimensions. Don't know what that means in the grand scheme of things but is sounds gnarly.


----------



## sakeido

phaeded0ut said:


> Pardon the tangent... Final Fantasy Advent Children (the first release) was done using White graphics engine for all of the work outside of fight scenes which were all frame-by-frame "hand" rendered, because the graphics engine couldn't produce the results the director wanted. A few years later with the Blue-Ray release, and now using Crystal Tools game engine, they've been able to redo everything using the game engine by itself. A little something to think about with FF XIII FINAL FANTASY XIII | SQUARE ENIX coming out (it uses the same game engine).



Advent Children was not done with a game engine. That is dumb hype for FFXIII.. you look at the in game screenshots and you see a huge gap between the cutscenes, which do look as good as AC, and the gameplay, which naturally does not. It is the typical Square strategy, dating back to FFVII, of hyping cutscenes as gameplay... saying AC was done with a 4 year old version of their game engine is an interesting market strategy but it is patently ridiculous.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

I thought he was talking about the first Final Fantasy movie, The Spirits Within. People were going apeshit over the CGI in that when it came out years ago.


----------



## pink freud

JJ Rodriguez said:


> I thought he was talking about the first Final Fantasy movie, The Spirits Within. People were going apeshit over the CGI in that when it came out years ago.



You are correct.







For 2001, such detail is quite amazing.


----------



## Bungle

I feel stupid right now so please tell me that I'm not the only person that thought this was a live action film based on that kids cartoon...

I actually would like to watch Avatar now that I realise this ahahaha.


----------



## t3sser4ct

Bungle said:


> I feel stupid right now so please tell me that I'm not the only person that thought this was a live action film based on that kids cartoon...
> 
> I actually would like to watch Avatar now that I realise this ahahaha.


I actually thought that it was based on the show until just now, when I clicked this thread and read your post. Maybe I won't ignore it after all...


----------



## Ibanezsam4

it is based off of something... its called Dances With Wolves


----------



## sakeido

Bungle said:


> I feel stupid right now so please tell me that I'm not the only person that thought this was a live action film based on that kids cartoon...
> 
> I actually would like to watch Avatar now that I realise this ahahaha.



you are not the only one. When I heard James Cameron was directly an Avatar movie I thought "really? wow!" but M. Night Shamhamhammlayan is directing the cartoon's movie


----------



## silentrage

JJ Rodriguez said:


> I thought he was talking about the first Final Fantasy movie, The Spirits Within. People were going apeshit over the CGI in that when it came out years ago.



I really don't think you can reproduce even the first FF movie with a real time game engine, the anti-aliasing alone will kill most home computers to a halt, and that's a post process, not even part of the meat of the actual rendering.


----------



## phaeded0ut

silentrage said:


> I really don't think you can reproduce even the first FF movie with a real time game engine, the anti-aliasing alone will kill most home computers to a halt, and that's a post process, not even part of the meat of the actual rendering.



No, I was referring to the second one, and the second release specifically of the second movie, "Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children" Blu-ray.com - Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children Announced for June

I'm trying to find the interview where Nomura talks about the second release that was used with Crystal Tools vs. White (the older 4 year-old version). I'll apologize now, if it was Square-Enix hype, but it sounded like they/he were much happier with the newer version in what it could and couldn't do. 
I will agree that the game play vs. cut scenes is always an issue for games. 

Didn't mean to hijack this thread.

Think that there were a few folks out there who were making the same mistake thinking that this was the live-action version of the anime series. There were quite a number of folks who were upset at the choice of the title for Cameron's movie. 

"Avatar: the Last Airbender" as a live-action film is still happening if my memory servers.


----------



## silentrage

Wow, I'll admit I didn't know much about this engine before, but the progress of real-time graphics has really progressed in a HUGE way since the days I started playing 3D games. (Descent anyone?)
I think they're closing the gap between real-time and prerendered in a way that most of the casual movie viewers won't distinguish the difference, probably just people who work in visual effects will care enough to do it.


----------



## sakeido

The difference is still huge, IMO. Even the next gen engines like id's Rage can't hold a candle to what pre-rendered CG can do these days


----------



## Ben.Last

They're getting good with certain things. Given, making something look "real" in real time still isn't happening but the gap between the two is closing. I was just watching a trailer for Dark Void and that game looks stunning. Also, games like Mass Effect are making huge strides in things like character expressions


----------



## Pauly

It is a huge difference. Films are 2d images playing at 24fps or whatever to create a moving image. Rendering a single frame can take hours, sometimes even days. You can make your models as poly-heavy as you like, sculpted to death in Z-Brush with sub surface scattering, ambient occlusion, insane particle effects, the works.

In a game engine, stuff is being rendered in real-time in 3d. This is far more demanding which is why games take as many shortcuts as they can (backface culling, normal maps, locked preset physics like the buildings/bridges blowing up in Half-Life 2: Episode 2 e.t.c) so the frame-rate can be kept high. If you tried to take a scene saved in Maya that was ready to be rendered, and play it as a game, you'd be waiting a looooooong time before anything happened haha.

Also 10 days till I go!


----------



## silentrage

You guys have to think in the grand scheme of things, back in the 90s we had Final Fantasy 7, and Jurassic Park. I dare say you could tell the difference between those pitiful 500 polygon game characters and the CG dinosaurs striding across the plains. 

Now you have pixel shader 3.0, 10,000 poly characters, normal map generated from 10 million poly zbrush sculpts, bump maps, HDRI lighting, fake Global Illum, reflections, refractions, subsurface scattering, specular bloom, soft shadows, I dare say for anyone who doesn't work in CGI, the difference is a LOT smaller.


----------



## canuck brian

sakeido said:


> you are not the only one. When I heard James Cameron was directly an Avatar movie I thought "really? wow!" but M. Night Shamhamhammlayan is directing the cartoon's movie



I'm avoiding the live action movie like the plague. MNS is going to butcher a great series and from what I saw in the trailer, he already did.

What I find really weird about the Avatar movie is that Cameron said he's had the idea in his head for years but it's so damn close to Dances with Wolves it's not even funny. I'll still check it out regardless.


----------



## silentrage

It happens dude, I had this idea way back in high school about a world with floating islands and flying medieval ships and stuff, that was way before I saw the same concept in FF12. We subconsciously store bits and pieces of ideas in our head, some from outside, some from within, then they manifest into a story, which is rarely truly original, and often just a rip off of something that made a big impression on us. That's what I think happened with Cameron.


----------



## phaeded0ut

sakeido said:


> The difference is still huge, IMO. Even the next gen engines like id's Rage can't hold a candle to what pre-rendered CG can do these days




Hate to say it, but I can't remotely disagree with the above statement. Things are becoming more photo-realistic, but it will take more time and quite a few more advances in technology before there is a complete 1:1 blend between the two.

Without generating a long tangential post, I agree with other posts that it is very amazing how far we've come since the days of vector graphics (think of early CAD animations) being top of the graphics capabilities. 

Found a possible image on ROTTEN TOMATOES: Movies - New Movie Reviews and Previews! for the new cameras, Cameron was using... It looks like a pair of cameras mounted vertically together, and they are tiny (relative to some of the more standard digital movie cameras out there).



silentrage said:


> It happens dude, I had this idea way back in high school about a world with floating islands and flying medieval ships and stuff, that was way before I saw the same concept in FF12. We subconsciously store bits and pieces of ideas in our head, some from outside, some from within, then they manifest into a story, which is rarely truly original, and often just a rip off of something that made a big impression on us. That's what I think happened with Cameron.



How many times and how long did it take for Ridley Scott to come up with, "Bladerunner: the Final Cut?" Wouldn't go so far as to use the phrase, "rip-off" but would instead use, "heavily influenced," otherwise, I'm in agreement with you.


----------



## sakeido

First round of reviews are coming in... 95% on rotten tomatoes so far. I'm thinking it'll settle in the low 80s, high 70s. But I get more and more pumped with each passing day!
and this one guy keeps comparing it to Hayao Miyazaki's movies, which is a very very good thing


----------



## phaeded0ut

sakeido said:


> First round of reviews are coming in... 95% on rotten tomatoes so far. I'm thinking it'll settle in the low 80s, high 70s. But I get more and more pumped with each passing day!
> and this one guy keeps comparing it to Hayao Miyazaki's movies, which is a very very good thing



I don't think it's gonna sink all that much to the high 70's, but then again, I could be wrong. 
Does anyone remember those very early reviews where the reviewers were making comments about this movie being for other directors? Here's to hoping that more teasers/trailers come out between now and the release, but from what little I've seen, I've got to doubt that initial opinion. 

Have to agree with other folks in hoping that this movie really succeeds at many levels.


----------



## Pauly

8 days!


----------



## Scar Symmetry

After reading the few reviews there are for this film on Metacritic, I have to say I am most eager to see it.

I'm hopeful that it won't disappoint.


----------



## silentrage

90%+ on rotten tomatoes?
I don't recall seeing movies rated above 90 on RT, ever. 
Hope Cameron didn't use 100 of that 250 million to pay off reviewers.


----------



## BigBaldIan

Scar Symmetry said:


> After reading the few reviews there are for this film on Metacritic, I have to say I am most eager to see it.
> 
> I'm hopeful that it won't disappoint.


 
You and me both. However since Roger Ebert and Empire (who are both pretty bang on when it comes to film reviews) have given it great reviews, I'm optomistic.


----------



## sakeido

silentrage said:


> 90%+ on rotten tomatoes?
> I don't recall seeing movies rated above 90 on RT, ever.
> Hope Cameron didn't use 100 of that 250 million to pay off reviewers.



Iron Man ended up at 94 if I remember right 
Avatar still above 90... that'd be awesome if it ended up there. I want it to get great reviews and do big business just so the internet hate bandwagoners can look like idiots!


----------



## phaeded0ut

sakeido said:


> Iron Man ended up at 94 if I remember right
> Avatar still above 90... that'd be awesome if it ended up there. I want it to get great reviews and do big business just so the internet hate bandwagoners can look like idiots!


----------



## BigBaldIan

Looking on Rotten Tomatoes the 4 (so far) negative reviews seem to be from critics who have their own agenda (namely boosting their own site hits).


----------



## technomancer

canuck brian said:


> I'm avoiding the live action movie like the plague. MNS is going to butcher a great series and from what I saw in the trailer, he already did.
> 
> What I find really weird about the Avatar movie is that Cameron said he's had the idea in his head for years but it's so damn close to Dances with Wolves it's not even funny. I'll still check it out regardless.



So my take from the trailers that it's Dances with Wolves in space was right? Awesome 

It looks like the animation is going to be stunning, but I probably won't end up going to see this.


----------



## ZeroSignal

canuck brian said:


> What I find really weird about the Avatar movie is that Cameron said he's had the idea in his head for years but it's so damn close to Dances with Wolves it's not even funny. I'll still check it out regardless.





technomancer said:


> So my take from the trailers that it's Dances with Wolves in space was right? Awesome



It's not like befriending your enemy to discover that they are actually the good guys isn't a _universally human_ story. Hell, with that logic you could say that it's a rip off of this film: Battle for Terra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Stealthdjentstic

Im really psyched to see this


----------



## ZeroSignal

Stealthtastic said:


> Im really psyched to see this





I'm seeing it tomorrow in 3D.


----------



## Daemoniac

Can someone explain to me what is so appealing about it? I mean that seriously too, I honestly just do not understand where the mass appeal is


----------



## ZeroSignal

Demoniac said:


> Can someone explain to me what is so appealing about it? I mean that seriously too, I honestly just do not understand where the mass appeal is



Primitive Tau vs Imperial Guard. What's not to love? Amirite?


----------



## Daemoniac

So it's just another me vs. other story pretty much? With token infiltration plan gone wrong?


----------



## ZeroSignal

Demoniac said:


> So it's just another me vs. other story pretty much? With token infiltration plan gone wrong?



I wouldn't be so critical. Every film plot boils down to something simple, otherwise it wouldn't be an easily understandable film. The Big Lobowski = Mistaken identity gone wrong. Run Lola Run = The butterfly effect. Terminator = Don't fuck with Ahnohld. Pearl Harbour = Everyone loves Kate Beckinsale and so on...


----------



## Daemoniac

I dunno man, I just don't see the appeal of the animation or the story, I think i'm just surprised at how much it's taken off...


----------



## Arminius

ZeroSignal said:


> Primitive Tau vs Imperial Guard.



Glad to know I'm not the only one who thought that 











Come to think of it, 40k tau are definitely cooler  If some kind of chaos marine analog is not inserted into this movie I will be sorely disappointed.


----------



## Daemoniac

That's what I mean, I keep drawing these intertextual references from the trailers, but every time I do I just think "[other movie/book/story that it's referencing] is better," and i'm honestly surprised that it's taken off _this_ much.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Aysakh said:


> Glad to know I'm not the only one who thought that
> 
> Come to think of it, 40k tau are definitely cooler  If some kind of chaos marine analog is not inserted into this movie I will be sorely disappointed.



Holy Shitballs, Batman! Where did that Fire Warrior come from? Post your response in the 40k thread (lets keep this one clean).

Also, Blood For The Blood God.


----------



## BigBaldIan

Okay just got back from the advance screening and enjoyed immensely. I'm still trying to wrap my brain around what I've just seen. You don't really notice the 160 minute run time, as for most of it you're bathing in the visual spectacle of the world of Pandora. The 3D is used deftly and is not the "omigod it's coming out of the screen", it just adds a depth of perspective to shots that wasn't there before.

Part love story, part western, part travel documentary, all win!


----------



## Arminius

160 minutes? Excellent


----------



## ZeroSignal

The 160 minutes part does indeed make me giddy... in the pants.




<---------------------


----------



## Arminius

^


----------



## silentrage

I think some of you guys might just be too anti mainstream to want to see it, which is understandable.
I still havn't seen titanic or twilight, and the only reason is because everyone says they're soooooooooooo gooooooooooooooood.


----------



## Daemoniac

^ I'm not anti mainstream, and i've seen Titanic... It was shit, and refuse to see Twilight because I generally detest vampire movies (i have a very set idea in my head of what a vampire is... no movie has pulled it off for me yet). The reason I don't want to see this is honestly because the character design for those alien guys is fucking atrocious IMO... Cartoony and (again IMO) just kind of lame  Add to that the fact that the story really doesn't seem overly amazing/original/well done, and I have absolutely zero reason to see it


----------



## silentrage

Agreed on the character design.
I don't actually know why I'm so excited about this movie myself, maybe it's because I'm in the field. ^^


----------



## sakeido

They look cartoony on your computer screen, but they definitely aren't on the big screen. Enough about the story already... every internet thread on this comes down to the same shit, over and over again. Guess what - a movie doesn't have to be original to be good, and a lot of the really original ones are completely unwatchable. You are really screwing yourself out of experiencing a stunning motion picture event if you don't see this in theaters, in 3D.

My review: 6 out of 5


----------



## K-Roll

one of the main character actually is quite older than he appears on the screen he doesn't even look animated on a screen of this size


----------



## ZeroSignal

My god. I just got back. Avatar is by far the greatest, most stunningly beautiful film I've ever seen. The 3D is just breathtaking.

I have no words to describe the majesty of what I have just witnessed. Not everyone is going to feel the same way as me but I am totally in love with this film. I will see it many times more in 3D.

Mischa, if you don't go to see this film you will seriously be missing out on an amazing experience. Even if you don't like the story you will love the visuals.

It is the visual equivalent of Cynic mixed with a Robert Venosa painting.

I'm still getting my head around what I have just seen.


----------



## Arminius

^ Going to watch it tomorrow, can't fucking wait


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I'm going to see it tomorrow night in 3D


----------



## Stealthdjentstic

IMAX HERE I COME BABY


----------



## Marv Attaxx

Just came back from the cinema and I thought it was pretty cool 
The visual are awesome!!
The cgi is almost perfect, looks very realistic. You gotta see the jungle in 3D! It just looks friggin' awesome 
But imho there's still a problem with the framerate, there's kinda an "overlayering-effect" in very fast scenes.I judders a lil bit. If they turn up the framerate in the next 3D movies this's gonna be a great time


----------



## Daemoniac

I'm going to bow out of this thread after this, I feel like i'm shitting on everybody's good time 



sakeido said:


> They look cartoony on your computer screen, but they definitely aren't on the big screen.



See it's not just that though, they look cartoony on my TV, cartoony on the 52"HD tv at my girlfriends parents' place, and just sort of silly no matter where I see them 



sakeido said:


> Enough about the story already... every internet thread on this comes down to the same shit, over and over again. Guess what - a movie doesn't have to be original to be good, and a lot of the really original ones are completely unwatchable.



That's true, but it honestly takes just one more reason _away _from me to see it... I'm already completely un-psyched to see the actual creatures and the world, then the one thing that could pull it back for me (a good story) is gone too 



sakeido said:


> You are really screwing yourself out of experiencing a stunning motion picture event if you don't see this in theaters, in 3D.





ZeroSignal said:


> Mischa, if you don't go to see this film you will seriously be missing out on an amazing experience. Even if you don't like the story you will love the visuals.



^ This is what's getting me the most... The visuals are the part that i'm least interested in... It honestly looks like a Disney movie to me from what i've seen in ads/promos/trailers/tv specials/whatthefuckever 








...  Ok, everyone else enjoy it though  I'm out !


----------



## sakeido

Demoniac said:


> I'm going to bow out of this thread after this, I feel like i'm shitting on everybody's good time



That's not it at all. You are completely fucking yourself out of a good time. 

The movie is insane to look at, by far the best spectacle I've ever seen. Star Wars of our generation for sure... surpasses Lord of the Rings. The story, while not original, is told competently and everyone puts in a good performance. The movie is just under three hours without a minute of padding. Sam Worthington is a badass and Sigorney Weaver, great as always. The name of colonel escapes me at the moment but he is a legendary badass for the ages.

If you think this looks cartoony, I regret to inform you that your inner child is completely, totally dead. 52" is not a big screen, and it is sure as hell not 3D either. 

3D movies are more money, but seriously. See it once for $20, because this is probably the only time in history where the movie theater is absolutely, positively the only place to watch a movie.
As far as vampire movie goes, have you not seen Nosferatu? Or better yet, Shadow of the Vampire, which is the best vampire movie I've ever seen?


----------



## Daemoniac

sakeido said:


> That's not it at all. You are completely fucking yourself out of a good time.



How? I clearly don't want to see it  The movie is apparently "visually stunning" sure, but other than the potential (i say potential because thus far the design of the characters and world just do not impress me, though in it's defense like you say i haven't seen it "in 3d") to impress me with that, it's got _nothing_ going for it so far as i'm concerned 



sakeido said:


> The movie is insane to look at, by far the best spectacle I've ever seen. Star Wars of our generation for sure... surpasses Lord of the Rings.



That's fair enough, but then, I hated LOTR as well... Even though Tolkien did half the work in writing the story, Peter Jackson still managed to fuck it up the arse as best he could...



sakeido said:


> The story, while not original, is told competently and everyone puts in a good performance. The movie is just under three hours without a minute of padding. Sam Worthington is a badass and Sigorney Weaver, great as always. The name of colonel escapes me at the moment but he is a legendary badass for the ages.



I have little doubt they all play their parts well... The thing about the story is that with the visuals not interesting me in the slightest (do not confuse "not well done/amazing" with "the style does not interest me at all"), it loses any possibility of being a truly "immersive" film for me; which is why I go to movies...



sakeido said:


> If you think this looks cartoony, I regret to inform you that your inner child is completely, totally dead. 52" is not a big screen, and it is sure as hell not 3D either.



I will concede that last point. I haven't seen it "how it was meant to be seen".




sakeido said:


> As far as vampire movie goes, have you not seen Nosferatu? Or better yet, Shadow of the Vampire, which is the best vampire movie I've ever seen?



I've seen "Nosferatu; Symphony of Terror," if that's what you're talking about and rather liked it though not necessarily as a 'vampire' movie. Thus far my favorite vampire movie is still Bela Lugosi's Dracula... but even that I think is more out of appreciation for Bela Lugosi himself.


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> The name of colonel escapes me at the moment but he is a legendary badass for the ages.



I've never seen anyone make holding their breath as incredibly badass as he made it.


----------



## Marv Attaxx

ZeroSignal said:


> I've never seen anyone make holding their breath as incredibly badass as he made it.


"Everyone put their mask on!!"
So badass


----------



## BigBaldIan

Okay I'll be seeing it again tonight and I'll cross-post my review from another forum in case anyone is interested.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In all honesty Im still trying to wrap my head around what I saw last night. Im not usually one for hyperbole but Mr. Cameron is back with a vengeance. Yes you can look at the story and claim its a Dances With Wolves/Pocahontas/Apocalypse Now/Last Samurai rip-off but youd be missing the point (see James Cameron's own take here). A story does not need to be original to be good and indeed many original scripts can be unwatchable (M. Night Shyamalan take a step forward). The basic plot premise is true and stands as a solid foundation to build the rest of the visual masterpiece.

Firstly said visuals, forget the trailers or anything you saw on a computer screen. Real3D on a big screen is a whole different kettle of (blue?) fish. The 3D effects are subtle as Ebert mentioned and dont detract from the viewing experience, lending tracking shots with a depth of perspective and a tangible sense of immersion. No cheap Omigod its coming out of the screen! shots to be had here. The blending of live and CG elements is practically seamless and the whole dead eye problem with CG actors has well and truly been put to bed. The hanger bay mecha shots will remind you of Aliens in a very good way, the technology looks solid, believable and grounded. The Navi look in no way cartoonish and every bit the big, blue, carbon-fibre reinforced predators theyre meant to be. When you leave however itll be the little things that leave an indelible impression as well as the big ones, Camerons eye for detail in this is extraordinary. 

James Horners score which calls upon an ethnomusicologist to create the Navis culture meshes perfectly even though I get hints of Titanic and Aliens again (no bad thing though). 

Okay now on to the acting, this may well be Sam Worthingtons breakthrough role. We as the audience follow him from jarhead spy, to warrior, to outcast, to saviour as he explores the world with an almost childlike sense of wonder at times (poking, prodding and generally making a nuisance of himself). Sigourney Weavers delightfully curmudgeonly Dr. Augustine raises a few chuckles with her acerbic humour. Stephen Lang puts in a great performance as Colonel Quaritch (now heading rapidly up my list of most badass cinema villains). Props also to Giovanni Ribisi as the banal face of evil Parker Selfridge who is definitely channeling the spirit of Carter Burke.

Summary: McG and Bay take note *this* how you make a blockbuster sci-fi movie. It is epic in the truest sense of the word, in time, in depth and in vision.


----------



## silentrage

Demoniac said:


> That's fair enough, but then, I hated LOTR as well... Even though Tolkien did half the work in writing the story, Peter Jackson still managed to fuck it up the arse as best he could...



Don't take this the wrong way but if you hated the LotR films that much you probably don't exist in the same dimension as I, so it's only natural you're not looking forward to avatar. That's a not a swipe at you though, we all have things we like or hate for reasons that are beyond other people.


----------



## Marv Attaxx

It's a day after watchin the movie and now I like it even better!!
The story is simple but it works very good 
The Action in the last half hour is so friggin badass 
And it was the first movie where I didn't care if a character was real or cgi because they look equally realistic. 
Cameron is back 
Can't wait to see what spielberg, lucas, jackson and others will do with that technologie


----------



## sakeido

Here's my little review too. 

Just saw it... its all true. The plot does rely pretty heavily on cliches. Story and character-wise, this is all stuff you have seen before. But it is also the craziest looking movie of all time. The CG is occasionally obvious, usually when the mechs and human helicopter-type things are on screen. The jungle, the creatures, the aliens.. the rest is fantastic. This movie looks insane! The 3D effect is definitely the best used I've seen.. really adds to the movie and it is never poking you in the eye. I was blown away by how bright and colorful it still was - Beowulf looked kind of washed out, but this was totally clear and COLORFUL... can't say that enough. The design work on this movie easily surpasses even what they put into the Lord of the Rings movies.

Everybody puts on a good show... the colonel is an unstoppable badass, like an elderly version of the Terminator. Sam Worthington is good too.. I thought he was the best actor in Terminator Salvation which isn't saying much, but he does an awesome job here. Uhura is great too as the female lead.. she is never actually on screen but turns in a great performance.

Even though the plot is by the numbers, it is still is a James Cameron movie. The guy does a great job keeping things rolling - it never started to drag. No cheeseball moments the likes of which have pervaded so many recent movies... but it did have lots of moments where the audience was audibly going "whoa... damn." Didn't feel like 2 hours and 40 minutes to me, not even close.

All in all, sick movie. Recommend it highly but I think the story is going to hold this one back from being one of the all time greatest movies... but this is still a straight 5/5


----------



## JakeRI

i have never been so emotionally attached. Cameron creates a culture and makes you fall in love with it. THe movie is absolutely beautiful


----------



## MickD7

JakeRI said:


> i have never been so emotionally attached. Cameron creates a culture and makes you fall in love with it. THe movie is absolutely beautiful



correct. this film was killer. 

Say what you will about the plot I dont really care about the whole dances with wolves idea and if its true who gives a crap its kevin costner. Cameron is a genius and sam worthington was excellent in this film. WEAVER.. oh how i have missed this lady in sci-fi films. Her and Cameron are an excellent team. 

and as for what other directors will do with this technology. I honestly believe that they will not be able to master it the way he has. Especially BAYSPLOSION. Lucas and Spielberg however providing the movie isnt a cash cow like indy 4 and they make something that isnt a sequel could make something real amazing. dont get me wrong huge fan of both their work especially the original star wars.but indy 4 was just a joke. 

The only directors I have true faith in are Cameron,Blomkamp(sp) and Ridley Scott and jj abrams. these guys could truly use the tech as we have seen with Cameron all ready to make visually amazing films with good acting,plot ect.


----------



## synrgy

MickD7 said:


> The only directors I have true faith in are Cameron,Blomkamp(sp) and Ridley Scott and jj abrams. these guys could truly use the tech as we have seen with Cameron all ready to make visually amazing films with good acting,plot ect.



Slightly OT, but JJ Abrams' Star Trek = massive, massive win.


----------



## phaeded0ut

sakeido said:


> 52" is not a big screen, and it is sure as hell not 3D either.
> 
> 3D movies are more money, but seriously. See it once for $20, because this is probably the only time in history where the movie theater is absolutely, positively the only place to watch a movie.
> 
> As far as vampire movie goes, have you not seen Nosferatu? Or better yet, Shadow of the Vampire, which is the best vampire movie I've ever seen?



Completely agree with the 52" comment. Now, on the 3D bit, hate to break it to you, but in just a few short months, sakeido, you'll be a bit wrong. Blu-ray 3D Specification Finalized, is PS3 Ready - Tom's Guide But in a good way.  Need an awesome sound system (go HDMI 1.3b) and TV (also HDMI 1.2+ for the video, no audio required), but it is still quite do-able at home. Just need the glasses. The thought of a Square Enix or other "pretty" game in 3D... Thankfully, the scotchguard (TM) pants are holding up nicely.

On the vampire movie, bit, gotta give you a +1 for both of your suggestions. Daybreakers looks like it'll be fun, but not remotely approaching the beauty of "Nosferatu."

Have to admit that I miss the physical modeling and costuming work that used to go into Sci Fi movies, but then again, the environment that was used for this film really looks gorgeous. 

Rather glad that the "villains" aren't all British Shakespearean Actors/Actresses; so at least one cliche was missed.


----------



## silentrage

3D is gonna get more common for sure, I recently found out that Maya is able to render stereoscopic 3D now, so basically anyone who can use it to produce images or short films can produce them in 3D that you can use glasses to see.


----------



## phaeded0ut

Yeppers, want to say that a few of the newer non-Autodesk products can also do this, too. Like I said, the Blue-Ray specification is gonna be huge!


----------



## ZeroSignal

JakeRI said:


> i have never been so emotionally attached. Cameron creates a culture and makes you fall in love with it. THe movie is absolutely beautiful



I couldn't have put it better myself. You just fall in love with the humans, the Na'vi, the luminous ground fungus, the seeds of the sacred tree, those crazy spinning gecko insect things... It's all so beautiful. I'd love to be able to live in a place that beautiful if I wasn't certain that I'd be horribly murdered by something gribbly in the undergrowth.


----------



## JakeRI

ZeroSignal said:


> I couldn't have put it better myself. You just fall in love with the humans, the Na'vi, the luminous ground fungus, the seeds of the sacred tree, those crazy spinning gecko insect things... It's all so beautiful. I'd love to be able to live in a place that beautiful if I wasn't certain that I'd be horribly murdered by something gribbly in the undergrowth.



yeah. its just gorgeous. i want to live there


----------



## sakeido

I've been thinking about it constantly the past couple days. Living there (as a Na'vi) would be kickass. As a human, the gas mask thing would get old after awhile. I'm smitten with the world James Cameron built.. that is for sure
Even just the small moments, like the night sky where you see the planet, one of the other moons, and then the moon's shadow on the planet... god damn. That's Star War's twin sunset for this generation.


----------



## JakeRI

sakeido said:


> I've been thinking about it constantly the past couple days. Living there (as a Na'vi) would be kickass. As a human, the gas mask thing would get old after awhile. I'm smitten with the world James Cameron built.. that is for sure
> Even just the small moments, like the night sky where you see the planet, one of the other moons, and then the moon's shadow on the planet... god damn. That's Star War's twin sunset for this generation.



Avatar :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> I've been thinking about it constantly the past couple days. Living there (as a Na'vi) would be kickass. As a human, the gas mask thing would get old after awhile. I'm smitten with the world James Cameron built.. that is for sure
> Even just the small moments, like the night sky where you see the planet, one of the other moons, and then the moon's shadow on the planet... god damn. That's Star War's twin sunset for this generation.



Agreed, 100%. I firmly believe that this is _our_ Star Wars.


----------



## sakeido

JakeRI said:


> Avatar :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews


Ebert is one of my Firefox homepages.. read his review the instant I saw it, and agreed with it. IMO, a story doesn't have to be original. If it is well told, I can handle it, and Avatar's certainly is very well told.



ZeroSignal said:


> Agreed, 100%. I firmly believe that this is _our_ Star Wars.


I would love to see some more Avatar movies but where could they go from here? All the possible follow ups (humans come back with a vengeance, Na'vi delegates visit earth, something like that) are just too obvious.. just this one movie is good enough for me. But I would definitely be seeing the next ones, if there are any.


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> I would love to see some more Avatar movies but where could they go from here? All the possible follow ups (humans come back with a vengeance, Na'vi delegates visit earth, something like that) are just too obvious.. just this one movie is good enough for me. But I would definitely be seeing the next ones, if there are any.



Personally I'd like to see some stories about Pandora from the eyes of the Na'vi. There's so much spirituality about the planet that there could be a hell of a lot of space to move in terms of story. Plus, Cameron says he's already got the overall gist of the sequel in his head. I'm feeling positive.


----------



## sakeido

oh yeah, this is something I noticed. Is it just me or does Jake's avatar change in appearance a bunch over the course of the movie? At first he's skinny and awkward, then by the end he's gotten ripped as hell from hanging out with Neytiri, flying around and climbing trees and whatnot. 
So many subtle details in this movie its insane.. gotta watch it again, at least two more times


----------



## JakeRI

also, think about avatar as literally star wars a new hope. next is the empire strikes back, so it would be the humans coming back to take over again for the sequel


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> oh yeah, this is something I noticed. Is it just me or does Jake's avatar change in appearance a bunch over the course of the movie? At first he's skinny and awkward, then by the end he's gotten ripped as hell from hanging out with Neytiri, flying around and climbing trees and whatnot.
> So many subtle details in this movie its insane.. gotta watch it again, at least two more times



Sure it takes place over 3/4 months. Innit? 

I'll be watching it at least 2 more times, myself.



JakeRI said:


> also, think about avatar as literally star wars a new hope. next is the empire strikes back, so it would be the humans coming back to take over again for the sequel



Personally, I'd hope it's not as predictable as that. Maybe since space travel takes so long (hence the cryostasis) that Jake Sully (aka Jakesully ) might actually be dead by the time that the retaliation arrives. That's assuming the Na'vi have life-spans similar to humans. It would kinda remind me of how the Imperial Guard/Navy operate.


----------



## Ben.Last

3D... DO NOT WANT. GO AWAY!!!!

Also, to add to the list of directors who know what to do with technology, David Fincher and Christopher Nolan. In actuality, I think they may even have a better grasp of it than someone like Cameron who goes beyond skillfully using it and into enamored with it territory.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Lern2swim said:


> 3D... DO NOT WANT. GO AWAY!!!!
> 
> Also, to add to the list of directors who know what to do with technology, David Fincher and Christopher Nolan. In actuality, I think they may even have a better grasp of it than someone like Cameron who goes beyond skillfully using it and into enamored with it territory.



I take it you haven't seen the film in 3D?


----------



## sakeido

Lern2swim said:


> 3D... DO NOT WANT. GO AWAY!!!!
> 
> Also, to add to the list of directors who know what to do with technology, David Fincher and Christopher Nolan. In actuality, I think they may even have a better grasp of it than someone like Cameron who goes beyond skillfully using it and into enamored with it territory.


watch the movie first dumbass


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Yep, it's official, Avatar is ridiculous. James Cameron > *

Directors seriously have to up their game if they want to continue selling dross that doesn't even hold a candle to this. They'll still do it no doubt, but they'll have a harder time doing it.

Bring on the DVD and bring on the obvious sequel.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

JakeRI said:


> i have never been so emotionally attached. Cameron creates a culture and makes you fall in love with it. THe movie is absolutely beautiful







sakeido said:


> This movie looks insane! The 3D effect is definitely the best used I've seen.. really adds to the movie and it is never poking you in the eye. I was blown away by how bright and colorful it still was - Beowulf looked kind of washed out, but this was totally clear and COLORFUL... can't say that enough. The design work on this movie easily surpasses even what they put into the Lord of the Rings movies.
> 
> Everybody puts on a good show... the colonel is an unstoppable badass, like an elderly version of the Terminator. Sam Worthington is good too.. I thought he was the best actor in Terminator Salvation which isn't saying much, but he does an awesome job here. Uhura is great too as the female lead.. she is never actually on screen but turns in a great performance.
> 
> *Even though the plot is by the numbers, it is still is a James Cameron movie. The guy does a great job keeping things rolling - it never started to drag. No cheeseball moments the likes of which have pervaded so many recent movies... but it did have lots of moments where the audience was audibly going "whoa... damn." Didn't feel like 2 hours and 40 minutes to me, not even close.*
> 
> All in all, sick movie. Recommend it highly but I think the story is going to hold this one back from being one of the all time greatest movies... but this is still a straight 5/5







MickD7 said:


> correct. this film was killer.
> 
> Say what you will about the plot I dont really care about the whole dances with wolves idea and if its true who gives a crap its kevin costner. Cameron is a genius and sam worthington was excellent in this film. WEAVER.. oh how i have missed this lady in sci-fi films. Her and Cameron are an excellent team.







MickD7 said:


> The only directors I have true faith in are Cameron,Blomkamp(sp) and Ridley Scott and jj abrams. these guys could truly use the tech as we have seen with Cameron all ready to make visually amazing films with good acting,plot ect.



I'm not sold on Blomkamp, but I'd add Werner Herzog to that list, brilliant director. Scorsese, Tarantino and Kathryn Bigelow are also all masters of their trade.



JakeRI said:


> yeah. its just gorgeous. i want to live there



You don't mean that, but I lol'ed 

This has been Zoe Saldaña's year! She has played the main female role in two of this years best films. She is fucking hot to boot.

Also, James Horner's score was beautiful, reminiscent of Titanic and Troy in places, but still brilliant work.


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> watch the movie first dumbass



I was speaking in general about 3D. I have a blanket aversion to 3D filmmaking. I don't want it and I don't like the fact that it's getting pushed so hard in an attempt by theater and film companies to get people in their seats. Notice, I didn't even say that there was anything objectively bad about the 3D, just that I, personally, have no desire for it... dipshit(since we're just throwing about random, uncalled for insults)

As for my assertion about Cameron being enamored with tech, that's fact. I didn't mean it in a way that in any way implies that he's not an amazing director. He's actually one of my favorites. All the same, I can't say I'm particularly psyched by Avatar, so sue me for having my own opinion.


----------



## sakeido

I was never a fan of 3D either. I saw Beowulf and the novelty of the 3D wore off right after they poked me in the eye with a spear so I haven't had any interest in a 3D movie since.. Avatar uses it in a completely different way. Its barely even there, and just adds depth to scenes to make them more realistic, I'd say. Cameron did love the tech that went into the movie, but he made an awesome movie while he was at it..


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> I was never a fan of 3D either. I saw Beowulf and the novelty of the 3D wore off right after they poked me in the eye with a spear so I haven't had any interest in a 3D movie since.. Avatar uses it in a completely different way. Its barely even there, and just adds depth to scenes to make them more realistic, I'd say. Cameron did love the tech that went into the movie, but he made an awesome movie while he was at it..



I don't doubt that. I do want to see it, I'd just rather see it in 2D


----------



## t3sser4ct

Lern2swim said:


> I don't doubt that. I do want to see it, I'd just rather see it in 2D


I thought the same thing. I've always thought of 3D as more of a gimmick. That said, I wanted to see the movie tonight, and I missed the 2D showing, so I watched the 3D version instead. I'm glad I did.

The depth really added something to the experience of the movie. It was tastefully done, and there weren't any really cheesy elements that jumped out of the screen to give you a cheap thrill, like in other 3D stuff. (The whole movie is filmed in 3D, by the way. It's not just the CGI elements.) Before watching Avatar tonight, I was almost completely opposed to the idea of 3D cinema, but now I'm convinced of how awesome it can be.

The 3D _was_ a little hard on the eyes, and I have a little bit of a headache after three hours of it (but it's not uncommon for me to get headaches after long movies), so I don't think 3D is perfected yet. It probably would've been better if the movie had been filmed at a higher frame-rate (which is what Cameron wanted to do). I really hope this is explored for future films.



As far as the plot of the movie (minor spoilers ahead)...



Spoiler



The only thing I didn't was how similar the Na'vi were to the way Native Americans are portrayed in Western films ("Western" as in "cowboys and Indians"). I'm not talking about the parallels between the cultures or the conflict (manifest destiny, anyone?), but just their appearance and speech.

Throughout the film, I found myself thinking about just how greedy and evil people can be, even here, in the present reality. Consumerism, unbridled capitalism, and wars for resources are all part of the modern world, unfortunately, and they are all paralleled in the movie. Hopefully this movie will provoke some thought.


----------



## Marv Attaxx

t3sser4ct said:


> I don't think 3D is perfected yet. It probably would've been better if the movie had been filmed at a higher frame-rate (which is what Cameron wanted to do). I really hope this is explored for future films.


Yeah, I thought the same. It judders a lil bit but only in very fast scenes. Didn't Cameron want to go with 48 frames?


----------



## Esp Griffyn

I still have not seen this, and I don't think I'll going to the cinema to see it. It does look a lot like style over substance to me. I have great confidence in Cameron's abilities to make something great (as in Aliens, Terminator 2 or True Lies) but he can churn out shit like Titanic. Unless there is some hidden depth to the story, what I gather from the trailer is its a very generic "Us vs Them" with a bit of a Romeo and Juliet love story thrown in. Hardly ground breaking, though I will wait until this comes on tv to watch it rather than spend money on it I think.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Esp Griffyn said:


> I still have not seen this, and I don't think I'll going to the cinema to see it. It does look a lot like style over substance to me. I have great confidence in Cameron's abilities to make something great (as in Aliens, Terminator 2 or True Lies) but he can churn out shit like Titanic. Unless there is some hidden depth to the story, what I gather from the trailer is its a very generic "Us vs Them" with a bit of a Romeo and Juliet love story thrown in. Hardly ground breaking, though I will wait until this comes on tv to watch it rather than spend money on it I think.



I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Cameron has made a completely new world and he takes you to the heart of it. He delivered on his promises big time and you're cheating yourself if you don't go see this film in 3D.


----------



## Marv Attaxx

It's just a few bucks to see it. Why not just see it and judge then?
You may loose a lil' bit of mony but either you're going to see a great movie with a great new technologie or you'll know that 3D really isn't for you. 
Either way you're going to see a pretty cool movie


----------



## silentrage

I always judge a movie on the trailer, is there any other way?


----------



## HammerAndSickle

Firstly, I find it incredibly pointless to defend this movie with things like "you're cheating yourself if you don't see it". People have differing tastes, end of story. 

I'm not totally enthused, I think it looks pretty dumb tbh. But if the blizzard clears up soon my girlfriend might wanna see it, so I'll tag along. I've got mixed feelings. The one thing that sucks is that I've NEVER been able to see a 3D image. Not old-school blue/red, not the new ones like Up, not even those lame ass optical illusions where you're supposed to see a racecar or a dolphin or some shit. My eyes are just unequipped to handle the illusion, I guess. Which sucks that it's only in 3D...


----------



## ZeroSignal

silentrage said:


> I always judge a movie on the trailer, is there any other way?



n00b. I judge movies entirely on anecdotal 3rd party evidence based entirely around how douchebaggy the directors hair looks. 



HammerAndSickle said:


> Firstly, I find it incredibly pointless to defend this movie with things like "you're cheating yourself if you don't see it". People have differing tastes, end of story.
> 
> I'm not totally enthused, I think it looks pretty dumb tbh. But if the blizzard clears up soon my girlfriend might wanna see it, so I'll tag along. I've got mixed feelings. The one thing that sucks is that I've NEVER been able to see a 3D image. Not old-school blue/red, not the new ones like Up, not even those lame ass optical illusions where you're supposed to see a racecar or a dolphin or some shit. My eyes are just unequipped to handle the illusion, I guess. Which sucks that it's only in 3D...



Basically you just said you're blind in one eye or you've got some sort of physiology yet to be discovered by science... Do you have 20/20 vision?


----------



## HammerAndSickle

No, I wear glasses... not sure what my vision's like but it's not TOO terrible. I've tried glasses off, glasses over the 3D ones, glasses under the 3D ones, contacts... nothing. I can see the parts where it's SUPPOSED to be three-d by a shimmer or a slight darkening of the area but it looks no different compared to without them.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

HammerAndSickle said:


> Firstly, I find it incredibly pointless to defend this movie with things like "you're cheating yourself if you don't see it". People have differing tastes, end of story.
> 
> I'm not totally enthused, I think it looks pretty dumb tbh. But if the blizzard clears up soon my girlfriend might wanna see it, so I'll tag along. I've got mixed feelings. The one thing that sucks is that I've NEVER been able to see a 3D image. Not old-school blue/red, not the new ones like Up, not even those lame ass optical illusions where you're supposed to see a racecar or a dolphin or some shit. My eyes are just unequipped to handle the illusion, I guess. Which sucks that it's only in 3D...



Not defending it, just telling people they're missing out, why is that so bad? We're trying to convince them to do something they'll enjoy!


----------



## vampiregenocide

I do want to see it, I personally don't like 3D though.


----------



## Daemoniac

Scar Symmetry said:


> Not defending it, just telling people they're missing out, why is that so bad? We're trying to convince them to do something they'll enjoy!



You mean like televeangelists tell us we're missing out on heaven 

"But i'm not interested in converting"
"Whatthefuckdoyoumean you're not 'interested'? It's a fucking experience alright, trust me" *pulls out gun*
"What?!? No fuck off!!!" *runs away*


----------



## ralphy1976

well, i just came back from watching this film and quite frankly ..

the plot is lame, you can guess what is going to happen

but

this is a total CGI wankfest, quite entertaining

not sure really, i feel it is a bit meehh, i should have known though as i never managed to watch more than 3min of titanic!!!

go to watch it for the CGI, nothing else!!!


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Demoniac said:


> You mean like televeangelists tell us we're missing out on heaven
> 
> "But i'm not interested in converting"
> "Whatthefuckdoyoumean you're not 'interested'? It's a fucking experience alright, trust me" *pulls out gun*
> "What?!? No fuck off!!!" *runs away*



You _will_ praise Jesus


----------



## t3sser4ct

ralphy1976 said:


> well, i just came back from watching this film and quite frankly ..
> 
> the plot is lame, you can guess what is going to happen
> 
> but
> 
> this is a total CGI wankfest, quite entertaining
> 
> not sure really, i feel it is a bit meehh, i should have known though as i never managed to watch more than 3min of titanic!!!
> 
> go to watch it for the CGI, nothing else!!!


I totally disagree. Just because the plot doesn't have as many twists as a Shyamalan flick doesn't make it lame. And the CGI wasn't there to impress with fancy effects; it was to help create an alien environment (a huge part of the story), adding some serious depth to the movie (which is the opposite of "CGI wankery", as far as I'm concerned). But I guess not everyone shares my opinion...


----------



## Scar Symmetry

In my humble opinion, this is the first time that both CGI and 3D have been used liberally but tastefully to create something more than just things you can't do in real life, this is potentially a turning point in cinema.

I'd like to point out that I am a huge movie buff and have been since I was kid, so I'm not just some prick who went to see it and then pretends he knows what he's talking about


----------



## MFB

I think I'm still the only one who doesn't give a shit about this movie, even after reading the last 3 pages. I don't give two shits if people says it's different from Dances with Wolves/Last Samurai/outsider-in-a-new-culture-and-falls-in-love-with-said-culture-and-must-now-defend-it movie cause in reality - it's not; plain and simple. If it relies on cliches and is a by the numbers kind of movie then don't say it's "different" because if it was different it wouldn't rely on cliches and be by the numbers.

If this is gonna be the Star Wars of my generation then I'd rather us have a redo

P.S. proceed with your neg-repping and  remarks


----------



## sakeido

MFB said:


> I think I'm still the only one who doesn't give a shit about this movie, even after reading the last 3 pages. I don't give two shits if people says it's different from Dances with Wolves/Last Samurai/outsider-in-a-new-culture-and-falls-in-love-with-said-culture-and-must-now-defend-it movie cause in reality - it's not; plain and simple. If it relies on cliches and is a by the numbers kind of movie then don't say it's "different" because if it was different it wouldn't rely on cliches and be by the numbers.
> 
> If this is gonna be the Star Wars of my generation then I'd rather us have a redo
> 
> P.S. proceed with your neg-repping and  remarks



I'll skip the neg rep (edit: sike!) but here's the 
It is different. Nothing like this has ever been put to the screen before. Just saw it again.. just as great the second time around. IMAX tomorrow!! 

I am starting to wonder if most of these trolls have seen a James Cameron movie before, aside from Titanic (beaten to death already, shut the fuck about fucking Titanic). I just watched Aliens again last night for the first time in ten odd years.. Avatar is much better. Aliens has no unique story, no unique characters, and generally weaker acting than what you get out of Avatar. The effects are still insane - how did they do that!? - but of all the movies James Cameron has made, I'm putting Avatar at #1..


----------



## silentrage

ralphy1976 said:


> this is a total CGI wankfest, quite entertaining



Great, that's what I'll be watching this movie for, cuz I know it'll rule at this.


----------



## MFB

sakeido said:


> I'll skip the neg rep (edit: sike!) but here's the
> It is different. Nothing like this has ever been put to the screen before. Just saw it again.. just as great the second time around. IMAX tomorrow!!
> 
> I am starting to wonder if most of these trolls have seen a James Cameron movie before, aside from Titanic (beaten to death already, shut the fuck about fucking Titanic). I just watched Aliens again last night for the first time in ten odd years.. Avatar is much better. Aliens has no unique story, no unique characters, and generally weaker acting than what you get out of Avatar. The effects are still insane - how did they do that!? - but of all the movies James Cameron has made, I'm putting Avatar at #1..



I've seen almost all of Cameron's work and for the most part his stuff is amazing and I've loved it - but from the first time I saw a trailer for Avatar I immediately was met with a sense of "I've seen this before somewhere?" and just shrugged it off because it had that immediate sense of 'this seems like it's an old concept under a new skin' which it still seems like. 

In a way Alien actually was a bit groundbreaking cause it featured a strong female lead which IIRC Cameron said he hadn't considered for Ridley - at all. Alien was suspensful and had this sense of loneliness since it was in outer space and through all of that you had a woman fighting for her life against this..._thing_ that NO ONE had ever lived to document. As for the story, granted it's just an alien encounter but it's the little bits that make it unique - the chestburster, the fact that it has a mouth _inside it's mouth_, and that it fucking has acidic blood. Etc etc, at the time no other alien movie was like that. It was all the old-school cheesy fucking style aliens like Close Encounter of The 3rd Kind where it was just lame and nothing really happened.

As for Titanic, well I've had my fair share of viewings (about 10 times in 2 days thanks to my fucking cousin some years back) and that movie can suck my nuts hardcore.


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> I'll skip the neg rep (edit: sike!) but here's the
> It is different. Nothing like this has ever been put to the screen before. Just saw it again.. just as great the second time around. IMAX tomorrow!!
> 
> I am starting to wonder if most of these trolls have seen a James Cameron movie before, aside from Titanic (beaten to death already, shut the fuck about fucking Titanic). I just watched Aliens again last night for the first time in ten odd years.. Avatar is much better. Aliens has no unique story, no unique characters, and generally weaker acting than what you get out of Avatar. The effects are still insane - how did they do that!? - but of all the movies James Cameron has made, I'm putting Avatar at #1..



I saw Avatar again last night and it was amazing. It didn't have the wonder that I had the first time I saw it, but it was still stunning. And Quaritch is still a bad-mother-fucker. 



Spoiler



Also, I saw a mistake in one of the very last scenes. When the Na'vi are escorting most of the humans to their shuttle when they're leaving, Norm is standing beside Max. The camera then shows Jake's avatar and behind him is a pointy nosed Na'vi wearing a shirt and trousers just like Norm's now deceased avatar except he has a bow instead of a machine gun.





MFB said:


> I've seen almost all of Cameron's work and for the most part his stuff is amazing and I've loved it - but from the first time I saw a trailer for Avatar I immediately was met with a sense of "I've seen this before somewhere?" and just shrugged it off because it had that immediate sense of 'this seems like it's an old concept under a new skin' which it still seems like.
> 
> In a way Alien actually was a bit groundbreaking cause it featured a strong female lead which IIRC Cameron said he hadn't considered for Ridley - at all. Alien was suspensful and had this sense of loneliness since it was in outer space and through all of that you had a woman fighting for her life against this..._thing_ that NO ONE had ever lived to document. As for the story, granted it's just an alien encounter but it's the little bits that make it unique - the chestburster, the fact that it has a mouth _inside it's mouth_, and that it fucking has acidic blood. Etc etc, at the time no other alien movie was like that. It was all the old-school cheesy fucking style aliens like Close Encounter of The 3rd Kind where it was just lame and nothing really happened.
> 
> As for Titanic, well I've had my fair share of viewings (about 10 times in 2 days thanks to my fucking cousin some years back) and that movie can suck my nuts hardcore.



Dude. You are acting just like a troll. You have not seen the film yet you insist on coming in the thread and telling us why it is "unoriginal" and how much you hate it. You are not contributing to this thread in any way. You really should see the film before you pass bullshit judgements on something you know nothing about. Although, I honestly think that there's no way for you to view it objectively with such vitriolic disdain for something you know nothing about.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I'm tempted to see it for a second time... in 3D or 2D? 3D was so good but I'm yet to see it in 2D, plus I wouldn't have to wear those stupid glasses...


----------



## Marv Attaxx

I'm gonna see it again with a friend!
It almost never happens that I watch a movie more than once at the cinema 
3d again!!


----------



## ZeroSignal

Marv Attaxx said:


> I'm gonna see it again with a friend!
> It almost never happens that I watch a movie more than once at the cinema
> 3d again!!



Same here, dude! And I'm going for a 3rd time in 3D on Tuesday!


----------



## JakeRI

going for my second time in 3d in an hour, 3rd time on christmas eve with my family, and fourth time in imax next week


----------



## Pauly

It was an awesome experience and took me in so well I ignored the cheesy, clichéd and predictable elements and just enjoyed it for the spectacle it was. To be able to take the characters as actual actors rather than 'that's good CG!' was a first. Highly enjoyable. The 3D worked well too, although the stereoscopic delivery could still be improve somewhat with regards to very subtle juddering.

Fucking epic though, good job Cameron.


----------



## sakeido

Biggest opening of all time for an all-new property (not a sequel or adaptation).. so it looks like Cameron has set some records already! 9th biggest opening of all time globally. #25 on IMDB's top 250, 94% on RT's top critics, universal acclaim on metacritic... 

the objective facts say the haters have to eat it now  

Just saw it again in IMAX 3D. The regular Real-3D is a lot better I think.. but the bigger screen & better sound make up for it


----------



## Daemoniac

Well, I always knew it was popular  just doesn't seem like my kind of movie. Who knows though, I may end up seeing it at some point... I know the missus' stepdad wants to see it


----------



## hotrodded_wooden_ mill

sakeido said:


> The design work on this movie easily surpasses even what they put into the Lord of the Rings movies.





Lotr took years of designing and developing and artistic, talented people working 24/7 for such "small" details as clothing, armor, architecture, etc.

The design at Avatar is really good, but let's be realistic here. Not on the scale of LOTR.


----------



## ZeroSignal

hotrodded_wooden_ mill said:


> Lotr took years of designing and developing and artistic, talented people working 24/7 for such "small" details as clothing, armor, architecture, etc.
> 
> The design at Avatar is really good, but let's be realistic here. Not on the scale of LOTR.



Actually... yes it is. It's been in the making (i.e. design phase) for 15 years.

And as for the amount of detail it took to make the film, it took 50 man hours for every 24th of a second to complete. (Sigourney Weaver, Sky News interview)

Don't compare Avatar to the entire LoTR trilogy as that wouldn't be fair. Compare it to The Fellowship of The Ring.


----------



## BigBaldIan

sakeido said:


> Biggest opening of all time for an all-new property (not a sequel or adaptation).. so it looks like Cameron has set some records already! 9th biggest opening of all time globally. #25 on IMDB's top 250, 94% on RT's top critics, universal acclaim on metacritic...
> 
> the objective facts say the haters have to eat it now
> 
> Just saw it again in IMAX 3D. The regular Real-3D is a lot better I think.. but the bigger screen & better sound make up for it


 
$232.18 million is the final weekend tally according to Fox. Considering the official budget of $237 and several countries have still to open, Mr Cameron can permit himself a rather large brandy at this point.


----------



## ZeroSignal

One thing I find interesting is how people seem to be comparing the Na'vi to Native Americans. I think they have far more in common with African tribes than American ones. Just an observation...



BigBaldIan said:


> $232.18 million is the final weekend tally according to Fox. Considering the official budget of $237 and several countries have still to open, Mr Cameron can permit himself a rather large brandy at this point.



Yay! Sequel time!!!


----------



## silentrage

Battle Angel Time!


----------



## Ckackley

ZeroSignal said:


> One thing I find interesting is how people seem to be comparing the Na'vi to Native Americans. I think they have far more in common with African tribes than American ones. Just an observation...
> 
> 
> 
> Yay! Sequel time!!!



From reading some articles , I'd say sequels are the point. The "weak" story people have been talking about was never the focal point of this whole deal anyway. The planet, it's environment and inhabitants are Cameron's baby. The upcoming video game release supposedly has nothing to do with the story in the movie, yet expands the mythos of the planet more. Look at "Predator". Those movies story wise are fairly lame yet the Predator species has become a Sci Fi staple. There's comic books and the Pred Vs Alien movies and franchise. There's some hard core Predator fans out there. I imagine we'll see the same with the Na'vi.


----------



## ZeroSignal

silentrage said:


> Battle Angel Time!



Not quite...

Cameron has said that Avatar success = Sequel. Avatar failure = Battle Angel.


----------



## silentrage

Really? That's a bummer, do you by chance have the link to where he said this?


----------



## orb451

James Cameron Talks 'Avatar' Sequel Plans - Movie News Story | MTV Movie News

Looks like we all better get damned used to seeing the Avatar name. According to the link above there are TWO sequels planned at this point. And according to the article the next installment is not going to be a prequel (thank christ).

If I had to guess I'd say the next one is going to be like Empire Strikes Back, the Marine force will come back in droves to exterminate the Na'vi and then the third installment will be their final victory... but that's just a lame guess by me and is not in the article at all.

As far as the poster who mentioned the Na'vi being more like African tribes, I think Cameron did a good job of clearly blending African and Native American tribal themes into the Na'Vi maybe even with a bit of Aztec/Mayan/Incan hints here n' there.

Overall this movie fucking rules. I went into it with a "meh" kind of attitude. I like Cameron's work but thought I'd just see some cool effects and a ho-hum story. I was completely blown away by the level of detail and the story itself.


----------



## sakeido

real life just seems so boring now  I've seen Avatar three times and still can't stop thinking about it. I'll see it a least a couple more times in theaters..


----------



## ZeroSignal

Cameron's original Avatar script is 244 pages long (that's pretty damn long in script terms) and he had to cut it down to 120-something. I don't think the next Avatar film will be a simple cash in, although I will be willing to eat my words if it is. Here's hoping, though...



orb451 said:


> As far as the poster who mentioned the Na'vi being more like African tribes, I think Cameron did a good job of clearly blending African and Native American tribal themes into the Na'Vi maybe even with a bit of Aztec/Mayan/Incan hints here n' there.
> 
> Overall this movie fucking rules. I went into it with a "meh" kind of attitude. I like Cameron's work but thought I'd just see some cool effects and a ho-hum story. I was completely blown away by the level of detail and the story itself.



Yup! You're right. There's little bits of Indian thrown in here and there, too.

The story might be simple but so is every story. I also love how EVERY character is developed and changes through the course of the film. No character is static (except for Quaritch who is a dangerous mo-fo in every scene ).



sakeido said:


> real life just seems so boring now  I've seen Avatar three times and still can't stop thinking about it. I'll see it a least a couple more times in theaters..



Same here. It's an addictive universe which is a testament to Cameron's writing and creative ability.


----------



## Pauly

orb451 said:


> James Cameron Talks 'Avatar' Sequel Plans - Movie News Story | MTV Movie News
> 
> Looks like we all better get damned used to seeing the Avatar name. According to the link above there are TWO sequels planned at this point. And according to the article the next installment is not going to be a prequel (thank christ).
> 
> If I had to guess I'd say the next one is going to be like Empire Strikes Back, the Marine force will come back in droves to exterminate the Na'vi and then the third installment will be their final victory... but that's just a lame guess by me and is not in the article at all.
> 
> As far as the poster who mentioned the Na'vi being more like African tribes, I think Cameron did a good job of clearly blending African and Native American tribal themes into the Na'Vi maybe even with a bit of Aztec/Mayan/Incan hints here n' there.
> 
> Overall this movie fucking rules. I went into it with a "meh" kind of attitude. I like Cameron's work but thought I'd just see some cool effects and a ho-hum story. I was completely blown away by the level of detail and the story itself.



After the movie finished my friends and I joked about what you could do with a sequel that wouldn't just be a rehash of the first film, in a sort of light-hearted jokey way. We decided by the 3rd film Jake should have figured out any sciencey mysteries of Pandora and become sort sort of cosmic environmental messiah, going back to Earth to make it all green and pretty again and spreading harmonious nature-love throughout the galaxy...dude.

Or not, lol.


----------



## orb451

Pauly said:


> After the movie finished my friends and I joked about what you could do with a sequel that wouldn't just be a rehash of the first film, in a sort of light-hearted jokey way. We decided by the 3rd film Jake should have figured out any sciencey mysteries of Pandora and become sort sort of cosmic environmental messiah, going back to Earth to make it all green and pretty again and spreading harmonious nature-love throughout the galaxy...dude.
> 
> Or not, lol.



Yeah that might be kind of cool, like the Neo of the Na'Vi, changing shit and making stuff work, etc.

Somehow though, I have a feeling it's going to be more like I said though (and it's pretty logical from a story-telling standpoint) - Jake n' Neyteri are living their happy lives, doing the tribal council thing, getting high off glowing flower paote, etc and then the fucking Marines show up and want to kill every living thing there... battles ensue, Neyteri is almost killed, Jake saves the day, Bob's your uncle.

Oh and along the way they have a little "Jake Jr." - badass in training or possibly killed in battle, setting the stage for an epic 3rd installment. Jake takes the fight to THEM. Poses as Land Shark with a FedEX Bio-weapons delivery to the Marines, teams up with the bitter Vazquez, Apone, Hicks & Hudson and proceeds to rip some serious ass on Earth, near Earth or some space station somewhere.

Fuck yeah, flying blue William Wallace looking heathens vs. Colonial Marines vs. Chest Bursters FTMFW.


----------



## ZeroSignal

orb451 said:


> Yeah that might be kind of cool, like the Neo of the Na'Vi, changing shit and making stuff work, etc.
> 
> Somehow though, I have a feeling it's going to be more like I said though (and it's pretty logical from a story-telling standpoint) - Jake n' Neyteri are living their happy lives, doing the tribal council thing, getting high off glowing flower paote, etc and then the fucking Marines show up and want to kill every living thing there... battles ensue, Neyteri is almost killed, Jake saves the day, Bob's your uncle.
> 
> Oh and along the way they have a little "Jake Jr." - badass in training or possibly killed in battle, setting the stage for an epic 3rd installment. Jake takes the fight to THEM. Poses as Land Shark with a FedEX Bio-weapons delivery to the Marines, teams up with the bitter Vazquez, Apone, Hicks & Hudson and proceeds to rip some serious ass on Earth, near Earth or some space station somewhere.
> 
> Fuck yeah, flying blue William Wallace looking heathens vs. Colonial Marines vs. Chest Bursters FTMFW.



Wait... Quick question... How the hell would the Na'vi or any other life form possibly get back to Terra?  Consider how long it takes the Human ships to get there (Alpha Centuri being 4.something light years away) they'd never be able to make it even if they had some sort of rudimentary space travel. Also, think about the Na'vi way of life. It's all about honour and loving other life despite the fact you have to kill it to survive and sometimes be killed by it (a la the noble savage concept by Jean Jacques Rousseau except less pretentious ). I also don't think they hate Humanity. They just want to be left alone.

I think the most likely outcome would be either humans returning (boring) or some sort of other story ark developing about something that threatens Pandora (exciting!) like other aliens or an adventure sparked by a revelation


Spoiler



while communing with the spirit tree and maybe the spirit of Dr. Augustine.


Hell, even making the story smaller and more intimate like the Omaticaya tribe having to defend themselves from another tribe or an ancient monster or something crazy like that. I think Cameron has so many ways he could play this out. I'm not at all pessimistic about a sequel.

Heh, look how we're talking and the film has only been out for 4 days!


----------



## Scar Symmetry

The sequel will be epic whatever it is 

I have faith!


----------



## sakeido

I'm with ZeroSignal.. I'd prefer a smaller, more intimate story than a way-too-obvious Revenge of Earth kind of thing


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> I'm with ZeroSignal.. I'd prefer a smaller, more intimate story than a way-too-obvious Revenge of Earth kind of thing



Yeah. I think it would be nice to explore Pandora more. Avatar was a great way to give a very solid overview of the entire world but without going into intimate detail.

Don't get me wrong, the Pandora from Avatar was incredibly detailed and in depth for a single film but I can't help but feel that there's much more to Pandora than Cameron is showing us. Not that he doesn't want to, but he also has to pander to the wishes of Fox Corp..


----------



## Empryrean

it was a good movie


----------



## ZeroSignal

[action=]Sigh...[/action] It really is too beautiful... 







Also, sweet zombie Jesus look at that detail! D:


----------



## Xaios

My idea:

Deadly plague begins to wipe out the Na'vi. Jake's avatar body is particularly hard-hit because of "imperfections" in the science used to create it, which make his immune system less effective than a typical Na'vi. As a result, he's forced to abandon his avatar and re-take his crippled human body to survive. Na'vi, having no other options, turn to Earth for aid, giving humanity uninhibited access to Unobtainium. Humans come and naturally ravage the landscape. However, then it comes to light that this disease is engineered against the Na'vi, specifically against Na'vi with human genetic traits. Upon this discovery, the Na'vi naturally suspect the humans whom they've recently allowed back on their world, and thus begin to attack them in full force. However, as it turns out, the true culprit is someone who's been there all along...


----------



## ZeroSignal

Xaios said:


> My idea:
> 
> Deadly plague begins to wipe out the Na'vi. Jake's avatar body is particularly hard-hit because of "imperfections" in the science used to create it, which make his immune system less effective than a typical Na'vi. As a result, he's forced to abandon his avatar and re-take his crippled human body to survive. Na'vi, having no other options, turn to Earth for aid, giving humanity uninhibited access to Unobtainium. Humans come and naturally ravage the landscape. However, then it comes to light that this disease is engineered against the Na'vi, specifically against Na'vi with human genetic traits. Upon this discovery, the Na'vi naturally suspect the humans whom they've recently allowed back on their world, and thus begin to attack them in full force. However, as it turns out, the true culprit is someone who's been there all along...



Jake's original human body is dead... Interesting concept though.


----------



## Xaios

Nothing ever truly dies in Hollywood.


----------



## sakeido

ZeroSignal said:


> Also, sweet zombie Jesus look at that detail! D:



got any more pics like that bottom one? so big and clear. I'm trying to find something desktop worthy..

edit: found some! pretty decent ones in 2560x1600 huge size
http://allwallpapersfree.blogspot.com/2009/12/amazing-avatar-wallpapers-2560-x-1600.html
mildly NSFW ads


----------



## ZeroSignal

I'm going for the 3rd time today. It'll be good to be back at Pandora. 

I _might_ go again some time next week.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

All the reviews below 85 on Metacritic are annoying me.



Portland Oregonian - Shawn Levy said:


> Is it a great movie? Maybe not. 83/100



WHAT?! Were you AWAKE whilst watching it?



New York Daily News - Joe Neumaier said:


> Avatar clears the hurdle in terms of being optical candy. Its story, though, is pure cheese. 60/100



What else did you want? A free cake? This movie has EVERYTHING.



The Onion (A.V. Club) - Scott Tobias said:


> Avatar is a weak patchwork of his other films: the leaden voiceover from "Terminator 2" here, the military/civilian conflict from "Aliens" there, even a Jack-and-Rose-style forbidden love story cued to adult-contempo soundtrack. 50/100



Weak patchwork? Are you sure you didn't walk into the wrong theater and ended up watching '2012'? Aside from that, you've COMPLETELY missed the point. I bet you're old.


----------



## 22km Tombstone

I haven't seen the movie yet, and I'm looking forward to it, but I couldn't help but  when I saw this.


----------



## Pauly

Those screen caps still look less amazing than when you see it on screen. I thought barring the suspension of belief required to believe in 10ft tall blue alien cat people existing, they were so lifelike that I just accepted the visuals as a regular movie and not 'CG'. 

Also number 2 definitely needs more Pandora, it's secrets, sciences and mysteries e.t.c. Btw gaiz, I haz The Art of Avatar book for Christmas and there's also a biology/ecology textbook thingy that's available for pre-order that I'll be getting. I'm such a fanboy already.


----------



## ZeroSignal

About the sequel:

Beyond Pandora: James Cameron may visit other moons in an 'Avatar' sequel | Hero Complex | Los Angeles Times



Pauly said:


> Also number 2 definitely needs more Pandora, it's secrets, sciences and mysteries e.t.c. Btw gaiz, I haz The Art of Avatar book for Christmas and there's also a biology/ecology textbook thingy that's available for pre-order that I'll be getting. I'm such a fanboy already.



Holy crap! Where can you get that Art of Avatar book and the Biology/ecology textbook thingy?


----------



## sakeido

I got my biology textbook thingy from Amazon. Its just called Avatar and its 224 pages. The art book is backordered until the new year though


----------



## synrgy

I'm going to see this tomorrow. I'm looking forward to being simultaneously bored and thrilled.


----------



## phaeded0ut

Scar Symmetry said:


> Directors seriously have to up their game if they want to continue selling dross that doesn't even hold a candle to this. They'll still do it no doubt, but they'll have a harder time doing it.
> 
> Bring on the DVD and bring on the obvious sequel.



Hate to disagree with you, but go to Blue-Ray, please! Your wallet may hate me, but you know I'm correct...  LOL! Looks like the Blue-Ray release may be a bit more happening... Especially, if it comes out after the 3D Specification is rolled out as firmware updates... Blu-ray.com - James Cameron Talks Avatar Blu-ray Plans

Only being slightly evil with the above link.

WOW! I see a few sweeps of technical awards going to this movie. Won't go into how pretty the world of Pandora was (I think that those of us who've seen the movie can readily agree that it would be fascinating to experience, though the HMD or Cave technologies couldn't handle the amount of information, right yet). Loved the 3D effects, it wasn't cheezy or over-used in my opinion, and was far easier on the eyes than what was previously done with, "9" and "Coraline." Story-wise, it was relatively simplistic, but then again, it was also quite approachable and likeable (if you don't get hung up on it being a science fiction story). I think that there could have been a little more in the script, but that's being a bit critical... 

Have to agree with Scar Symmetry on this one... James Cameron has really set an awesome new level for movies. 

For a sequel, I have to admit that I'd love to see something more Iain M. Banks/Michael Straczynski bent: something where a government of Earth shows up in some fashion or another, but do so from the eyes of the Na'vi without the use of cutting back and forth between the human side (should be blind to the Na'vi anyway).

Another option is slightly more Stephen Gahgan/Alan Moore-ish and that would be to have the Company be bought out by a rival and then have the replacements show up in a more conciliatory manner, at first... Would also be interesting to continue the "Western" theme and this time have Na'vi tribes that have aligned themselves with the new humans. Especially if this were to occur prior to any ground offensives perpetrated by either side.

Just my $0.02 worth.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I don't see how you disagreed with me?


----------



## phaeded0ut

Just say, "NO!" to DVD, and instead upgrade to Blue-Ray, m8!  That was really it. LOL!


----------



## silentrage

I'm kinda bummed out that he may be fiscally obligated to do avatar sequels instead of battle angel but I might just dig avatar so much when I finally get to see it that I won't give a shit. And if he ends up doing battle angel 3-5 years later when the technology is more mature then it's a win-win.


----------



## phaeded0ut

^ Took the words right out of my mouth!


----------



## Tiger

Best of Olivia '09: Avatar Parody Trailer Teaser in High Definition ? G4tv.com


----------



## phaeded0ut

Tiger, that was great! HAhahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaaaa!


----------



## Tiger

My official new catch phrase is "Im gonna kill all ya'll blue skinned cat monkeys."


----------



## synrgy

Tiger said:


> Best of Olivia '09: Avatar Parody Trailer Teaser in High Definition ? G4tv.com



Will somebody please give me Olivia Munn for Christmas?


----------



## MFB

synrgy said:


> Will somebody please give me Olivia Munn for Christmas?



I'd be happy to send you the new copy of Maxim she's in 

Apparently she's also single again


----------



## Pauly

I got mine off Amazon too!


----------



## sakeido

Just got my little Avatar handbook thing in. There is some very cool stuff in here... tons!!! of stuff that didn't make it into the movie.


----------



## synrgy

Okay. I saw this today.

You guys probably noted from my previous posts that I was honestly expecting this to be 'meh' at best. I couldn't have gone in being more skeptical if I'd wanted to.

That being said..

It was amazing. Absolutely amazing. Maybe not the most original overall plot, but I was rivited through the entire film. Absolutely loved it. Looking forward to seeing it at least one more time before it leaves theaters.

So yeah. Both of my thumbs are way up, and I'm SO glad to have been wrong on this one.

I can't say anything that hasn't already been discussed here. I just wanted to post in case anybody else out there is skeptical like I was. This one's the real fucking deal. Best (non 'cerebral') movie I've seen in ages. For sci/fi, action/adventure, fantasy stuff, I'd say it REALLY IS on par with the ones we all hold dear like Star Wars or the Matrix, etc.


----------



## TheHandOfStone

That's it, I have to see this. All the positive reviews have removed all of my apathy.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Here ye, see this in 3D and become believers!

Glad to see that you enjoyed it as much as I did Carl


----------



## BigBaldIan

Had some smart-arsed naysayers on another forum bleating on about the "marketing budget", which is allegedly another $100-150 million on top of the film's production cost. 

Avatar (2009) - Box Office Mojo 

Oops is that a weekly tally of $381 million then? Could it be that Avatar has well and truly made "all" of its costs back now? I have some crow here and it's nice and fresh....... Will also be seeing it again before it goes out of cinemas.


----------



## MF_Kitten

i just saw this the other day, and it was stunning. it was a goosebumps-inducing movie that made me go "whooooaaaaah!" inside. and that's not a "cool CGI" kind of "whoah!", it's more of a "this movie as a whole is amazing!" kind of "whoah!"

there whole idea of the planet, it's creatures, and the culture of the people, just ends up being amazing.

for some reason i got this feeling of nostalgia when i saw it. this is the kind of movie i've been missing for a long time. they used to make fantastically epic movies like this, but they haven't done that for such a long time. i'm so happy this movie stayed true to itself!

there is so much to absorb when you see it, like how many cool designs, ideas, and moments are occuring all over the place, but it never gets hard to absorb.

i really wish there were cinemas displaying it in 3d though. i wanna see it in 3d!!!


----------



## Scar Symmetry

MF_Kitten said:


> for some reason i got this feeling of nostalgia when i saw it. this is the kind of movie i've been missing for a long time. they used to make fantastically epic movies like this, but they haven't done that for such a long time. i'm so happy this movie stayed true to itself!



Same here man! I got the same feeling I got from when I watched Jurassic Park for the first time, that sense of wonder and amazement. I welcome that feeling back any time!


----------



## Pauly

I found myself feeling exactly the same way as you guys. It's a special movie and I'm still finding myself thinking about it...really glad it's doing well. Nerdy for sure, but I can't wait to go back to Pandora! Hope we get a trilogy every bit as memorable as the original Star Wars.

Btw, the Art of Book has an introduction by Peter Jackson who was just as inspired by the movie as us, and Spielberg is in interviews saying he felt the same way watching this as he did Star Wars.

MF it's good to know you felt that way and didn't even see it in 3D. IMO it wasn't totally essential to the film, but since it acted like a window into the screen, with all the added depth, you really felt more like an observer and therefore it added to the experience. I wouldn't say it's like seeing a colour film in black and white, but I would say you're missing out. Sorry! If Cameron gets his way though, you'll be seeing 3D Blu Rays and the 120hz TVs and a pair of glasses will give you the extra dimension. After the first few minutes, like the CG, it became transparent which I feel makes it even more of a success. Honestly, when you see the first scenes of Jake coming out of Cryo in the Venture Star your jaw will drop a little.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Pauly said:


> MF it's good to know you felt that way and didn't even see it in 3D. IMO it wasn't totally essential to the film, but since it acted like a window into the screen, with all the added depth, you really felt more like an observer and therefore it added to the experience.


----------



## synrgy

you guys are doing well to describe the feeling it gave me. That's how a movie is truly successful for me; when it completely sucks me in and becomes a 'fly on the wall' experience that is indeed so immersive that when the movie is over I feel a little sad and wish that the fantasy world depicted were actually real so that I could experience it first hand. Like, Star Wars made me want to be a Jedi (and fly an X-Wing) SO BAD. The Matrix left me wondering if I could actually figure out how to fly as I was leaving the movie theater. Lord of the Rings made me wish Middle Earth was a real place so I could go there and like... Live at Rivendell, or something.

That's what this movie did. It made me truly forget the bland real world for a few measley hours and experience something grand. I fell in love with the world of the Na'vi; the way they had evolved for direct interaction with their environment and each other. So much so that I wish I could be one of them, because it's a hell of a lot better than what we're doing here on Earth. Their _fictional_ culture is easier for me to identify with than what I know of _non-fictional_ humanity. IE, Their understanding of how energy exists and works is very in-line with my own spiritual identity. "We get to borrow it for a time, but will have to give it back".

So yeah. Just.. wow. Not just for the movie, but for what a total nerd I am.


----------



## vampiregenocide

synrgy said:


> you guys are doing well to describe the feeling it gave me. That's how a movie is truly successful for me; when it completely sucks me in and becomes a 'fly on the wall' experience that is indeed so immersive that when the movie is over I feel a little sad and wish that the fantasy world depicted were actually real so that I could experience it first hand. Like, Star Wars made me want to be a Jedi (and fly an X-Wing) SO BAD. The Matrix left me wondering if I could actually figure out how to fly as I was leaving the movie theater. Lord of the Rings made me wish Middle Earth was a real place so I could go there and like... Live at Rivendell, or something.
> 
> That's what this movie did. It made me truly forget the bland real world for a few measley hours and experience something grand. I fell in love with the world of the Na'vi; the way they had evolved for direct interaction with their environment and each other. So much so that I wish I could be one of them, because it's a hell of a lot better than what we're doing here on Earth. Their _fictional_ culture is easier for me to identify with than what I know of _non-fictional_ humanity. IE, Their understanding of how energy exists and works is very in-line with my own spiritual identity. "We get to borrow it for a time, but will have to give it back".
> 
> So yeah. Just.. wow. Not just for the movie, but for what a total nerd I am.



Thats exactly why I love these big CGI fests. For a couple hours we can revert back to the mind of a 5 year old and those glorious times when anything was possible. 

And I agree again, I wish I was an alien living in some beautiful jungle far away with amazing creatures. But, we have terrorists, unemployment and Brokencyde!


----------



## BrainArt

I just got back from the theaters from seeing this with my cousin/best friend/brother, his gf, and my our Uncle. I have to say I was greatly impressed with it, and will be buying it when it comes out on DVD. I feel that it might be one of the best movies I've ever seen, and it already ranks up in my top 3, along with Step Brothers and Scarface.


----------



## Fred

Got round to seeing this with my little bro on Christmas Eve and enjoyed it far, far more than I was expecting. Wasn't feeling that great and am really not a big fan of the cinema (prices and other people trying their utmost to ruin the film for you being my pet peeves), but it totally sucked me in for the whole 3 hours. Seriously stunning visuals, an enjoyable story line, and generally a pretty excellent film. Oh, and I got some sweet 3D glasses too.


----------



## Pauly

IbanezShredderB said:


> I just got back from the theaters from seeing this with my cousin/best friend/brother, his gf, and my our Uncle. I have to say I was greatly impressed with it, and will be buying it when it comes out on DVD. I feel that it might be one of the best movies I've ever seen, and it already ranks up in my top 3, along with Step Brothers and Scarface.



3D BluRay dude! Or at the least normal BluRay!


----------



## BrainArt

Pauly said:


> 3D BluRay dude! Or at the least normal BluRay!



I don't have a BluRay player. :/


----------



## Tiger

Pft you're American, buy one. Get into the spirit.


----------



## Pauly

They're less expensive than they used to be and they'll play all your old DVDs with the bonus of upscaling them if they're semi-decent. A PS3 means you can play a few games too... and it's definitely going to have a software update so it can play the 3D BR standard that they want to get going.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I think once Avatar is released on BluRay, I'll buy a PS3


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> I think once Avatar is released on BluRay, I'll buy a PS3



Same. Maybe...


----------



## Arminius

Well after waiting an agonizing week to see the movie I was not disappointed. I do believe Sr. synrgy summed up my feelings exactly. I stayed through the whole credits role just so i could fly around in the forest a little more.




synrgy said:


> you guys are doing well to describe the feeling it gave me. That's how a movie is truly successful for me; when it completely sucks me in and becomes a 'fly on the wall' experience that is indeed so immersive that when the movie is over I feel a little sad and wish that the fantasy world depicted were actually real so that I could experience it first hand. Like, Star Wars made me want to be a Jedi (and fly an X-Wing) SO BAD. The Matrix left me wondering if I could actually figure out how to fly as I was leaving the movie theater. Lord of the Rings made me wish Middle Earth was a real place so I could go there and like... Live at Rivendell, or something.
> 
> That's what this movie did. It made me truly forget the bland real world for a few measley hours and experience something grand. I fell in love with the world of the Na'vi; the way they had evolved for direct interaction with their environment and each other. So much so that I wish I could be one of them, because it's a hell of a lot better than what we're doing here on Earth. Their _fictional_ culture is easier for me to identify with than what I know of _non-fictional_ humanity. IE, Their understanding of how energy exists and works is very in-line with my own spiritual identity. "We get to borrow it for a time, but will have to give it back".
> 
> So yeah. Just.. wow. Not just for the movie, but for what a total nerd I am.


----------



## pink freud

Just got back from seeing it 3D. It sucks, because now all other movies won't measure up to the awesomeness that was this movie. If there was a film school class purely on immerging an audience into a movie, this is the movie to use. 

My only qualm is the amount of material that was obviously lifted off of Roger Dean that wasn't accredited to him. The floating islands, stone arches and the color scheme of the dragon creatures specifically.


----------



## poopyalligator

So generally I am not the kind of person who says how awesome movies are or anything, but in this case I will say that Avatar is possibly the best movie I have EVER seen before. Everything about the movie was great. If any of you have doubts about this movie I would recommend going to see it (preferably at somewhere with imax 3d) Definitely in my top 3.


----------



## ZeroSignal

..You hear that Mischa? Go see the damn film...


----------



## Arminius

ZeroSignal said:


> ..You hear that Mischa? Go see the damn film...



^  You too MFB. 

Definitely going to find a way to see this again at least three or four times before it's out of theaters. I could have literally watched it again right after the credits ended. I fucking love Pandora


----------



## ZeroSignal

For those who want to read a little into the wonders of James Cameron's Pandora:

Amazon.com: Avatar: A Confidential Report on the Biological and Social History of Pandora (James Cameron's Avatar) (9780061896750): Maria Wilhelm, Dirk Mathison: Books

Click the picture to read a few pages.


----------



## BigBaldIan

Bought that book for myself and the Art of Avatar for the missus. It even goes into Na'Vi mathematics a little (Octal based).


----------



## Arminius

BigBaldIan said:


> Bought that book for myself and the Art of Avatar for the missus. It even goes into Na'Vi mathematics a little (Octal based).



Don't the tau have a number system based on 8? Or maybe six.

:foilhat:


----------



## Daemoniac

ZeroSignal said:


> ..You hear that Mischa? Go see the damn film...



 I may at some point... I'm still just not "interested" in it. I'm positive the visuals are spectacular and all that jazz, but i just can't get past the looks of it.. It still doesn't much interest me


----------



## JakeRI

i love that this whole thread is 98% about how awesome it is, 1% of how it is going to suck, and 1% people who said it would suck before went and saw it and were blown away.


VICTORY


----------



## BrainArt

JakeRI said:


> i love that this whole thread is 98% about how awesome it is, 1% of how it is going to suck, and 1% people who said it would suck before went and saw it and were blown away.
> 
> 
> VICTORY




Hahaha, yeah. Before I even saw the movie, and just the previews; I thought it was going to be an awesome movie. And it is.


----------



## sakeido

JakeRI said:


> i love that this whole thread is 98% about how awesome it is, 1% of how it is going to suck, and 1% people who said it would suck before went and saw it and were blown away.
> 
> 
> VICTORY



Avatar outgrossed the new much buzzed about Sherlock Holmes in its second weekend, dropping only about 2% from its debut weekend. Set records (or almost set records) for every weekday. Its made $210 mil already.

VICTORY


----------



## ZeroSignal

I'll have a VICTORY steak with a side order of VICTORY. Also, I'll have one of your VICTORY shakes but hold the DEFEAT. Thanks.

VICTORY


----------



## Arminius

The last few posts have decided to make me sign my posts in this thread with VICTORY


VICTORY


----------



## Prydogga

HOLY FUCK! Just came back from seeing it. I never thought any movie could make me feel like I was there so much. This movie has so many different elements, and the special effects are something to be really proud of, like when they use those handheld holographic computers and you can see in it in the reflection of the glass as well. Best movie I've seen in a long time!!

VICTORY


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

I want to see more Na'vi side boob.


----------



## MickD7

saw it again last night. fucking even better a second time around.


----------



## BigBaldIan

sakeido said:


> Avatar outgrossed the new much buzzed about Sherlock Holmes in its second weekend, dropping only about 2% from its debut weekend. Set records (or almost set records) for every weekday. Its made $210 mil already.
> 
> VICTORY



Out for 10 days and worldwide box office takings now grossing $615 million. Well and truly in the black no matter how you look at it, I'm wondering whether it will go on to beat Titanic.


----------



## Pauly

Sweet! I'm really glad it's had the impact Cameron hoped it would. Go Avatar!


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

BigBaldIan said:


> Out for 10 days and worldwide box office takings now grossing $615 million. Well and truly in the black no matter how you look at it, I'm wondering whether it will go on to beat Titanic.



I hope so, can't have that fucking chick flick taking up the top spot  It needs to be something bad ass, like this movie. Titanic didn't have a single shot of alien side boob, it can go fuck itself.


----------



## synrgy

JJ Rodriguez said:


> I hope so, can't have that fucking chick flick taking up the top spot  It needs to be something bad ass, like this movie. Titanic didn't have a single shot of alien side boob, it can go fuck itself.



Not to mention, said alien side boob belongs to this sexy little thing:







(AKA Uhura from the recent Star Trek movie by JJ Abrams)


----------



## Arminius

Going to see it again in a few hours


----------



## JakeRI

synrgy said:


> Not to mention, said alien side boob belongs to this sexy little thing:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (AKA Uhura from the recent Star Trek movie by JJ Abrams)



mmmmmmmmmm


----------



## Scar Symmetry

synrgy said:


>


----------



## JakeRI

Scar Symmetry said:


>



VICTORY


----------



## synrgy

She's officially added to my recurring Christmas Wish List, along with Scarlett Johansson and Olivia Munn.


----------



## HighGain510

I saw Avatar in Real-D 3D this morning. Absolutely awesome.  I don't often see movies twice, but I am honestly thinking of going to see it again, but in IMAX 3D. It was that cool!


----------



## HighGain510

Double-posted apparently due to the movie being too awesome!

VICTORY?


----------



## RenegadeDave

Saw it saturday in 3D. 

It was a pretty formulaic plot, but it was executed exceptionally well.

There was like no dead time on screen. Great editing, great directing. 

The world they created was pretty cool, the fauna and flora were really cool. Very easy to immerse yourself into the world (especially in 3D). 

AND! the 3d glasses fit my huge pumpkin head. 

I want to see it again.


----------



## Pauly

What Titanic did for girls, Avatar is doing for guys if this thread is anything to go by haha.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

What man doesn't dream of meeting an exotic alien species....and fucking it?


----------



## ZeroSignal

JJ Rodriguez said:


> What man doesn't dream of meeting an exotic alien species....and fucking it?








"We have failed to uphold Brannigan's Law. However I did make it with a hot alien babe. And in the end, is that not what man has dreamt of since first he looked up at the stars?"


----------



## HammerAndSickle

Just as a follow-up to my previous postings in case anyone says I "knocked it without trying it"...

My girlfriend went and saw it without me, started raving about how it's the "best movie of all time". So on date night we went out and saw it together a second time. Honestly, I didn't enjoy it, and it wasn't worth 14 bucks. 

As I've said before, for some reason I can't see the 3-D (and from what I've read in articles, I'm not the only one. There's evidence to support that the saturation of the medium isn't optimal specifically for situations like this). So I spent the entire movie playing a dancing game with the glasses on/off. With them on, it was alright, almost like a regular non-3d movie with afterimages. But whenever there was a sudden splash of 3D, I got these splitting headaches down the front of my skull. At one point during the ending "war" scene I got physically nauseous. Now this I was unprepared for, as other 3D movies had at best given me mild discomfort. After one of these "attacks" I'd take the glasses off for 10-20 minutes and be treated to a blurry undefined wash of a movie with a few clear focal points. Lame.

Aside from the technical issues of the medium, I really did not enjoy it as much as even my cynicism expected. The CGI is always praised as being so well implemented but I really saw the whole thing as basically a video game. The character design both for the natives and the creatures seemed overly cartoony, and everything I read about creating such an in-depth world crumbled down to "they touch shit with their tentacles and magic happens." Nothing was explained in any sense beyond their mysticism. And the story itself apart from the world it's set in was very trite as well. 

Not that my opinion matters, but consider me one huge vote of dissent for this movie.


----------



## Prydogga

I WANNA SEE IT IN 3D!!!!!  I'm gunna go for a 4 hour drive to go see it in 3d, this movie is that awesome.

VICTORY


----------



## Arminius

Still awesome the second time  Though I am starting to feel that the soundtrack is a bit lacking, but everything else makes up for it.  Most likely going for time 3 later in the week.


----------



## sakeido

Aysakh said:


> Still awesome the second time  Though I am starting to feel that the soundtrack is a bit lacking, but everything else makes up for it.  Most likely going for time 3 later in the week.



I'm just going to say straight out the soundtrack fucking blows. Gets the job done, barely, but its a huge missed opportunity.. think of the hooks some other big fantasy movies have, and then try to think of one from Avatar. There isn't because it is all just trash. 

Just saw it again tonight.. time #5  once more after this, maybe? I've seen it in regular 3D, IMAX 3D and Dolby Digital 3D now... and Dolby 3D looks far and away the best. Incredibly sharp, the 3D stuff doesn't jitter like the IMAX does, and the glasses are more comfortable. Imax sound is still the best but its picture wasn't anywhere near as good.


----------



## poopyalligator

I just saw that movie again today, and guess what? It was still badass lol. I didnt see it in 3d this time, but in some sort of way I think i prefer it without the 3d. The sound was still great and i got to check out everything that i missed while watching it the first time (which wasnt much because i was glued to the screen). So if there is anybody still on the fence about going to see this movie just go do it, it does not matter if you think the graphics are going to look cheesy or anything. It is just a badass movie


----------



## BrainArt

I wouldn't mind going to see this a 2nd time, I loved it when I saw it on Christmas.


----------



## BigBaldIan

HammerAndSickle said:


> Just as a follow-up to my previous postings in case anyone says I "knocked it without trying it"...
> 
> My girlfriend went and saw it without me, started raving about how it's the "best movie of all time". So on date night we went out and saw it together a second time. Honestly, I didn't enjoy it, and it wasn't worth 14 bucks.
> 
> As I've said before, for some reason I can't see the 3-D (and from what I've read in articles, I'm not the only one. There's evidence to support that the saturation of the medium isn't optimal specifically for situations like this). So I spent the entire movie playing a dancing game with the glasses on/off. With them on, it was alright, almost like a regular non-3d movie with afterimages. But whenever there was a sudden splash of 3D, I got these splitting headaches down the front of my skull. At one point during the ending "war" scene I got physically nauseous. Now this I was unprepared for, as other 3D movies had at best given me mild discomfort. After one of these "attacks" I'd take the glasses off for 10-20 minutes and be treated to a blurry undefined wash of a movie with a few clear focal points. Lame.
> 
> Aside from the technical issues of the medium, I really did not enjoy it as much as even my cynicism expected. The CGI is always praised as being so well implemented but I really saw the whole thing as basically a video game. The character design both for the natives and the creatures seemed overly cartoony, and everything I read about creating such an in-depth world crumbled down to "they touch shit with their tentacles and magic happens." Nothing was explained in any sense beyond their mysticism. And the story itself apart from the world it's set in was very trite as well.
> 
> Not that my opinion matters, but consider me one huge vote of dissent for this movie.




Okay this is a bit confusing, you know 3D movies are bad news yet you went anyway. As for the whole "bonding" concept (have done the courtesy of spoilering my answer in case people reading haven't seen it). 



Spoiler



Grace did expound on the whole planet (and its organisms) being effectively a giant network at least twice. The first time before the Thanator attacked when she and Norm were doing experiments on the tree roots (and noting that there was electro-chemical information transfer). The second was when she confronted Parker Selfridge and pretty much said it directly.

I would argue that there is very little in the way of actual "magic" in the film at all. The bonding is just a bio-technological neural link, although it does raise questions about why species would evolve in such a manner. Perhaps if Eywa is indeed sentient (sentience being an emergent property of the root network in the same way it is an emergent property of our neurons) there may be some argument for intelligent design on a planetary level.



Anyway, sorry you didn't enjoy it but it would be a boring world if we all had the same tastes.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

HammerAndSickle said:


> As I've said before, for some reason I can't see the 3-D (and from what I've read in articles, I'm not the only one. There's evidence to support that the saturation of the medium isn't optimal specifically for situations like this). So I spent the entire movie playing a dancing game with the glasses on/off. With them on, it was alright, almost like a regular non-3d movie with afterimages. But whenever there was a sudden splash of 3D, I got these splitting headaches down the front of my skull. At one point during the ending "war" scene I got physically nauseous. Now this I was unprepared for, as other 3D movies had at best given me mild discomfort. After one of these "attacks" I'd take the glasses off for 10-20 minutes and be treated to a blurry undefined wash of a movie with a few clear focal points. Lame.



Like I said, the 3D fucked with me too, not quite that bad though  I did like the movie however.

I can't wait for this to come out on Bluray, and I read on Wikipedia that James Cameron has 2 sequels planned for this if it did well, and I'd say it did  It'll be cool to see where he takes this.


----------



## JakeRI

sakeido said:


> I'm just going to say straight out the soundtrack fucking blows. Gets the job done, barely, but its a huge missed opportunity.. think of the hooks some other big fantasy movies have, and then try to think of one from Avatar. There isn't because it is all just trash.
> 
> Just saw it again tonight.. time #5  once more after this, maybe? I've seen it in regular 3D, IMAX 3D and Dolby Digital 3D now... and Dolby 3D looks far and away the best. Incredibly sharp, the 3D stuff doesn't jitter like the IMAX does, and the glasses are more comfortable. Imax sound is still the best but its picture wasn't anywhere near as good.



i actually liked the soundtrack. the climbing of the mountain was the hook for me. although horner did use a little melodic motif from the troy score for certain battle scenes


----------



## HammerAndSickle

BigBaldIan said:


> Okay this is a bit confusing, you know 3D movies are bad news yet you went anyway. As for the whole "bonding" concept (have done the courtesy of spoilering my answer in case people reading haven't seen it).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Grace did expound on the whole planet (and its organisms) being effectively a giant network at least twice. The first time before the Thanator attacked when she and Norm were doing experiments on the tree roots (and noting that there was electro-chemical information transfer). The second was when she confronted Parker Selfridge and pretty much said it directly.
> 
> I would argue that there is very little in the way of actual "magic" in the film at all. The bonding is just a bio-technological neural link, although it does raise questions about why species would evolve in such a manner. Perhaps if Eywa is indeed sentient (sentience being an emergent property of the root network in the same way it is an emergent property of our neurons) there may be some argument for intelligent design on a planetary level.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, sorry you didn't enjoy it but it would be a boring world if we all had the same tastes.



I went cause my girlfriend said it was great and I wanted to see what she saw in it. No huge mystery there but yes, I would've preferred to see it in 2d but the theater didn't offer anything except Imax 3D showings at the time we went.



Spoiler



Yes, that's exactly the point. The movie is praised as creating such an excellent environment yet nothing was really explained. I suppose I can see the "network" idea (it is just a movie, not anything truly important) but that explanation still seems like total BS to me. It's the same type of recycled psuedoscience that comic books use all the time, like "radioactive isotopes injected in the spider's venom gave Peter parker SUPER POWERS!" It's an alien world, but it doesn't seem like a lot of effort was put into reconciling it with our physical reality.

The creatures would also not be a part of this "network" if it existed. Ignoring the deity for a minute, the first law of an ecosystem is that species are codependent, not necessarily connected. While a species may adapt and perform best in a specific environment, there's no telling of its resilience to leave. The animals they use as mounts in the story live in wildly different areas (mountains for the dragonbird things and the plains for the zebrahorses) so why would they still be connected to the network? Not to mention, why would evolution develop so many "locks" (animal orifices, trees, the Life Tree, etc) but only one "key" (hair tendrils)? It makes very little biological sense to have the whole ecosystem serve the Na'vi while they return basically nothing to it. They're not predated by any creatures nor do they have any outright symbiotic effects. It might be surmised that their bonding helps the slave organism in some way but the movie never shows it.

For what it's worth, I watched District 9 again the other day (had seen it in theaters already and enjoyed it) and when it comes to "building an environment" that movie wins. Even though the humans know barely ANYTHING about the alien species, the movie builds a sense about who they are and how they operate by showing the slums they've been forced into and how they adapt. It doesn't attempt to explain what it can't with bullshit science, which makes me think higher of that movie's integrity.

As an aside, if they really wanted to go about the "create an intellectual property" thing they could've used better names than "unobtanium" "tree of Life" and "tree of Voices". They're kinda cliched, sort of overused, and definitely lame.


----------



## synrgy

Man.. I sure don't bother to put that kind of thought into things when I'm watching a fantasy movie..

All our knowledge is based on our own existence and experience. What we think we know about how the universe works may very well be proved quite wrong when and if we're able to set foot on other worlds. With that thought, I personally don't bother trying to analyze the theoretical science behind this fantasy world.


----------



## HammerAndSickle

I only say so to dissolve some of the praise it gets for "creating a world". Most of the feedback says the story sucks, but the WORLD is what you go for! And outside of visually, the world has little depth either.


----------



## synrgy

HammerAndSickle said:


> I only say so to dissolve some of the praise it gets for "creating a world". Most of the feedback says the story sucks, but the WORLD is what you go for! And outside of visually, the world has little depth either.



I disagree. 

I guess my point was, I feel that it only 'lacks depth' if you hold it up to 'real world' standards, which I don't believe one should considering it's blatantly a work of fiction.

I felt fully immersed in their world, because I just allowed them to take me on the ride without analyzing every little detail for 'real world accuracy'.


----------



## HammerAndSickle

Well we disagree, then. Not saying my way it the only way to view it, so don't hold it against me 

I don't feel like I'm overanalyzing it. Really, what I'm saying it that FIRST I had the moment where I could no longer suspend my disbelief, then I went back and figured out why it was so ridiculous. The whole point of "fiction" is to do it well enough that the viewer or reader doesn't realize it's fiction while they're watching it. Suspension of disbelief is the main struggle in fantasy storywriting. A lot of movies do it well: I'm an overly-logical guy but I've walked out of some movies and still thought the movie was real because of how well it was written. Star Wars, for all of its failings and actually using many of the cliches I argue against, still has created such an immersive world that people consider themselves Jedis.

A lot of movies, books, and games I can get into and immerse myself: Avatar I couldn't. Once he started talking to the girl


Spoiler



after she saves him from the jackalwolves


 it broke the illusion and I leaned over to my girlfriend to comment on a lot of the absurdities in the movie. Just didn't do it for me. I think I ruined it for her, too: before we saw it together she was so psyched and saying it was "the best movie ever" but afterwords she agreed with me that it was sorta "meh"


----------



## sakeido

HammerAndSickle said:


> I went cause my girlfriend said it was great and I wanted to see what she saw in it. No huge mystery there but yes, I would've preferred to see it in 2d but the theater didn't offer anything except Imax 3D showings at the time we went.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that's exactly the point. The movie is praised as creating such an excellent environment yet nothing was really explained. I suppose I can see the "network" idea (it is just a movie, not anything truly important) but that explanation still seems like total BS to me. It's the same type of recycled psuedoscience that comic books use all the time, like "radioactive isotopes injected in the spider's venom gave Peter parker SUPER POWERS!" It's an alien world, but it doesn't seem like a lot of effort was put into reconciling it with our physical reality.
> 
> The creatures would also not be a part of this "network" if it existed. Ignoring the deity for a minute, the first law of an ecosystem is that species are codependent, not necessarily connected. While a species may adapt and perform best in a specific environment, there's no telling of its resilience to leave. The animals they use as mounts in the story live in wildly different areas (mountains for the dragonbird things and the plains for the zebrahorses) so why would they still be connected to the network? Not to mention, why would evolution develop so many "locks" (animal orifices, trees, the Life Tree, etc) but only one "key" (hair tendrils)? It makes very little biological sense to have the whole ecosystem serve the Na'vi while they return basically nothing to it. They're not predated by any creatures nor do they have any outright symbiotic effects. It might be surmised that their bonding helps the slave organism in some way but the movie never shows it.
> 
> For what it's worth, I watched District 9 again the other day (had seen it in theaters already and enjoyed it) and when it comes to "building an environment" that movie wins. Even though the humans know barely ANYTHING about the alien species, the movie builds a sense about who they are and how they operate by showing the slums they've been forced into and how they adapt. It doesn't attempt to explain what it can't with bullshit science, which makes me think higher of that movie's integrity.
> 
> As an aside, if they really wanted to go about the "create an intellectual property" thing they could've used better names than "unobtanium" "tree of Life" and "tree of Voices". They're kinda cliched, sort of overused, and definitely lame.





Spoiler



I had every indication that much of Pandora's wildlife was the product of intelligent design, probably guided by Eywa. And then the network bit.. how else would you explain that? Our consciousness is an emergent quality of our neurons. If Pandora is connected in the same manner, then would it not possibly be sentient too?

The ecosystem doesn't serve the na'vi. They are a part of it. Did you not notice that predators had no problems going after na'vi? They are food.. just like everything else. This part of the movie was the most blatant na'vi = natives. I thought we learned all about how natives fit into the environment back in school? Of all your criticisms, this one is the most disingenuous. 

Most things on earth can be traced back to common ancestry. Since the network on Pandora is evidently quite important, it would be a desirable biological trait to keep the hair tendrils around, so everything ended up with them. In some cases they seem to be vestigial but quote the guidebook.. "there is little evolutionary pressure" on Pandora so most everything has kept the tendrils.

Then the same stupid complaint every nitpicker has.. unobtanium is not a serious name and has been around for years. Tree of Voices, Tree of Souls.. that's the English translation of a na'vi word. of course it sounds like something you've heard before  This is fucking stupid because you apparently decided to hate the movie and then never gave it a fair shake. It all makes perfect sense when you get into it and the depth goes far, far beyond what they were able to show in the movie.


But District 9? Really? I just watched it again to see how it measured up to Avatar and it was vastly inferior.. the world was boring, because it is our world, and then the aliens are explained in one sentence and never elaborated upon further so they too are boring. Plus I hated looking at them because they made little visual sense. And I hated the protagonist. And it had more, and bigger plot holes, than Avatar. And the shaky cam...


----------



## synrgy

HammerAndSickle said:


> Well we disagree, then. Not saying my way it the only way to view it, so don't hold it against me
> 
> I don't feel like I'm overanalyzing it. Really, what I'm saying it that FIRST I had the moment where I could no longer suspend my disbelief, then I went back and figured out why it was so ridiculous. The whole point of "fiction" is to do it well enough that the viewer or reader doesn't realize it's fiction while they're watching it. Suspension of disbelief is the main struggle in fantasy storywriting. A lot of movies do it well: I'm an overly-logical guy but I've walked out of some movies and still thought the movie was real because of how well it was written. Star Wars, for all of its failings and actually using many of the cliches I argue against, still has created such an immersive world that people consider themselves Jedis.
> 
> A lot of movies, books, and games I can get into and immerse myself: Avatar I couldn't. Once he started talking to the girl
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> after she saves him from the jackalwolves
> 
> 
> it broke the illusion and I leaned over to my girlfriend to comment on a lot of the absurdities in the movie. Just didn't do it for me. I think I ruined it for her, too: before we saw it together she was so psyched and saying it was "the best movie ever" but afterwords she agreed with me that it was sorta "meh"



Totally understood. I'm definitely not saying you're wrong, just offering my alternate viewpoint. In matters of taste, there is no correct or incorrect.

In fairness, I don't see how the Na'vi's culture was any more 'bullshit' than the 'midiclorian' explanation of how the force works from Star Wars Episode I.


----------



## HammerAndSickle

Oh we don't talk about the prequel trilogy  we don't talk about that...


----------



## sakeido

HammerAndSickle said:


> Oh we don't talk about the prequel trilogy  we don't talk about that...



Return of the Jedi, anyone?


----------



## phaeded0ut

Won't disagree that the writing (plot and dialogue) could have used a bit more polish, especially in naming a few items that occur within the movie.


Spoiler



I hope that in the future, the explanation for one item's name is due to "political" and/or "religious" reasons on the side of the humans.


 Seemed to have a few lines that were more "video game-esque" than I'd have liked. Granted, I'm also a bit more picky about such things and realize that not everyone likes Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Iain M. Banks, or C.J. Cherryh's abilities of explanation or lack thereof... Yes, all of the aforementioned authors are very different in their relative technical explanations. 

I must however completely disagree with you and others; this movie explains everything quite well, to the point of leaving very little to the imagination of the viewer, unfortunately. Wasn't really much that was left unanswered in this movie. Yes, we don't know how much lower the gravity was on Pandora relative to Earth standard. We don't know if the humans had FTL as the planet that Pandora was orbiting looked suspiciously like Jupiter, etc. , ... About the only real question that was left in my mind was why the company didn't just simply drop a few rocks from orbit and be done with it rather than waste all of the materiel and lives on an aerial assault? Seemed like they were working themselves up to it and then lost their will (really loathe stupid villains in stories). Honestly, I'd have preferred more moral ambiguity within the film (less caricature). Would've liked less of an idyllic social structure/setting for the Na'vi. Would've also liked to have seen more interaction between the Na'vi tribes. Maybe in the next movie?


Spoiler



Have you thought that Cameron could've been borrowing an idea of a unified mind as is within the air worlds of Iain M. Banks in his "Culture" series? Another option and far more entertaining is Douglas Adams' take on this in his "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" series' explanation of "Earth" (mk's I and II). <--- Relative to the comments concerning the inter-connectedness of all of Pandora's life forms. Have to admit that a Douglas Adams reason would bring more of a smile to my face than not. 



This said, I must totally agree that there were not any wasted shots, editing was amazing and the sound track was fairly happening. Loved the fact that whatever software they were using did an amazing job handling all of the motion (yes, as stated earlier, there are a few jitters in some of the faster motion shots). Flames didn't always look/behave in a "realistic" manner, but then again, we don't really know what the atmosphere of Pandora contained other than it was not usable by humans, but not caustic or otherwise toxic. The occasional Kurosawa vista shot was never out of place or for that matter seemed a necessary inclusion. 

Between the two (I've seen it in IMAX and in "standard 3D") the IMAX version is a level up, and I think that it had to deal with audio coming together with what was going on in the screen. Seemed a bit shadowy when passing through entities in a gathering and gave it a "video game" feel for a few scenes, but over all, very pretty and impressive. This shadowy effect was a little more pronounced in the non-IMAX version. Had a great time with this movie both times, and as stated prior, can't wait for it to come out on Blue-Ray.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

JakeRI said:


> i actually liked the soundtrack. the climbing of the mountain was the hook for me. although horner did use a little melodic motif from the troy score for certain battle scenes



Aye  Props for noticing the Troy motif. There was also a very similar motif to Titanic in the later, more emotional parts of the film. + rep 

Brian, really? I marked District 9 down as one of the biggest disappointments of 2009. Second half of the film is utter trash.



sakeido said:


> But District 9? Really? I just watched it again to see how it measured up to Avatar and it was vastly inferior.. the world was boring, because it is our world, and then the aliens are explained in one sentence and never elaborated upon further so they too are boring. Plus I hated looking at them because they made little visual sense. And I hated the protagonist. And it had more, and bigger plot holes, than Avatar. And the shaky cam...



 Not to mention cliches aplenty in the second half of the film. In a way it was way more disappointing than Transformers 2, because the first half of District 9 I really enjoyed, whereas Transformers 2 was full of suck, start to finish.


----------



## phaeded0ut

sakeido said:


> Return of the Jedi, anyone?



I feel a disturbance in the farce... and in my Schwartz!


----------



## HammerAndSickle

sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I had every indication that much of Pandora's wildlife was the product of intelligent design, probably guided by Eywa. And then the network bit.. how else would you explain that? Our consciousness is an emergent quality of our neurons. If Pandora is connected in the same manner, then would it not possibly be sentient too?
> 
> The ecosystem doesn't serve the na'vi. They are a part of it. Did you not notice that predators had no problems going after na'vi? They are food.. just like everything else. This part of the movie was the most blatant na'vi = natives. I thought we learned all about how natives fit into the environment back in school? Of all your criticisms, this one is the most disingenuous.
> 
> Most things on earth can be traced back to common ancestry. Since the network on Pandora is evidently quite important, it would be a desirable biological trait to keep the hair tendrils around, so everything ended up with them. In some cases they seem to be vestigial but quote the guidebook.. "there is little evolutionary pressure" on Pandora so most everything has kept the tendrils.
> 
> Then the same stupid complaint every nitpicker has.. unobtanium is not a serious name and has been around for years. Tree of Voices, Tree of Souls.. that's the English translation of a na'vi word. of course it sounds like something you've heard before  This is fucking stupid because you apparently decided to hate the movie and then never gave it a fair shake. It all makes perfect sense when you get into it and the depth goes far, far beyond what they were able to show in the movie.
> 
> 
> But District 9? Really? I just watched it again to see how it measured up to Avatar and it was vastly inferior.. the world was boring, because it is our world, and then the aliens are explained in one sentence and never elaborated upon further so they too are boring. Plus I hated looking at them because they made little visual sense. And I hated the protagonist. And it had more, and bigger plot holes, than Avatar. And the shaky cam...



@Sakeido: No need to get angry, dude. I know you love the movie and saw it a trillion times but I think it's trash. To address your points in order...


Spoiler



Maybe it's part of the "fantasy" thing but I definitely don't buy intelligent design  they worship the being, whatever, and it's made clear that it has powers throughout the movie, but it doesn't conceal the fact that its a elementary deus ex machina at best. Plot holes being concealed like that really aren't concealed at all, anyone can see through it. "This makes no sense!" "Oh, God did it" "Ah... alright. I guess"

I meant that the ecosystem served them in the sense that their "key" fits every "lock" but nothing else really gets a benefit from them. I also don't remember the predatory creatures ever attacking anyone except Jake. In the beginning with the big Rhino thing or the little jackalwolves or that big shadowy stalker thing, but he's the only one I remember seeing attacked. The girl seemed to have a much more stable relationship with them, she even said "they only attack us if we bother them" when she's bitching to Jake about how she shouldn't have had to kill them.

The Na'vi have their tendrils that let them control and domineer the creatures and plants. How is that not a case of the ecosystem evolution serving them over everything else? That's like giving a chicken an evolutionary handle to make it easier for us to eat them with our hands, it's absurd. 

And yes, the names are important when all the movie has to go on is its unique intellectual property. World of Warcraft at least goes one step further by including the translation like "Angra'thar: The Wrath Gate." Stephen King's Dark Tower takes the step by translating _ka-tet_ into "family" or whatever. We get the English meaning but such linguistic terms really add to the depth that a world has. Like whatever they called Tatooine's twin moons in Star Wars. Is it really important? No. But is it cooler and more immersing than using third-grade vocabulary to name your plot elements? Yes.

I already said that I didn't entirely hate the movie. I enjoyed it much less than I expected, but I still thought some of the effects were cool, and the design of the creatures (while clearly fantastical) was still pretty striking, especially that Shadow Panther thing. I liked the action scenes for what they were worth, but as far as creating a world or having a unique storyline it fails in my eyes.

I loved District 9 but I won't try and convince you of its worth. But at least that movie had an interesting dynamic with the human elements of the story: the parallels to genocides in our world as well as the human rights implications of what's being done to the "non-humans" as well as the sheer audacity of the researchers to commit such illegalities held much more appeal to me than the pretty standard plot of Avatar.


----------



## sakeido

HammerAndSickle said:


> @Sakeido: No need to get angry, dude. I know you love the movie and saw it a trillion times but I think it's trash. To address your points in order...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it's part of the "fantasy" thing but I definitely don't buy intelligent design  they worship the being, whatever, and it's made clear that it has powers throughout the movie, but it doesn't conceal the fact that its a elementary deus ex machina at best. Plot holes being concealed like that really aren't concealed at all, anyone can see through it. "This makes no sense!" "Oh, God did it" "Ah... alright. I guess"
> 
> I meant that the ecosystem served them in the sense that their "key" fits every "lock" but nothing else really gets a benefit from them. I also don't remember the predatory creatures ever attacking anyone except Jake. In the beginning with the big Rhino thing or the little jackalwolves or that big shadowy stalker thing, but he's the only one I remember seeing attacked. The girl seemed to have a much more stable relationship with them, she even said "they only attack us if we bother them" when she's bitching to Jake about how she shouldn't have had to kill them.
> 
> The Na'vi have their tendrils that let them control and domineer the creatures and plants. How is that not a case of the ecosystem evolution serving them over everything else? That's like giving a chicken an evolutionary handle to make it easier for us to eat them with our hands, it's absurd.
> 
> And yes, the names are important when all the movie has to go on is its unique intellectual property. World of Warcraft at least goes one step further by including the translation like "Angra'thar: The Wrath Gate." Stephen King's Dark Tower takes the step by translating _ka-tet_ into "family" or whatever. We get the English meaning but such linguistic terms really add to the depth that a world has. Like whatever they called Tatooine's twin moons in Star Wars. Is it really important? No. But is it cooler and more immersing than using third-grade vocabulary to name your plot elements? Yes.
> 
> I already said that I didn't entirely hate the movie. I enjoyed it much less than I expected, but I still thought some of the effects were cool, and the design of the creatures (while clearly fantastical) was still pretty striking, especially that Shadow Panther thing. I liked the action scenes for what they were worth, but as far as creating a world or having a unique storyline it fails in my eyes.
> 
> I loved District 9 but I won't try and convince you of its worth. But at least that movie had an interesting dynamic with the human elements of the story: the parallels to genocides in our world as well as the human rights implications of what's being done to the "non-humans" as well as the sheer audacity of the researchers to commit such illegalities held much more appeal to me than the pretty standard plot of Avatar.



I'm just going to get angry because you are just saying "I refuse to believe!" without making any sense whatsoever



Spoiler



If it makes sense within the movie for there to be a sentient immune-system type thing over the planet, and it is foreshadowed right from the first na'vi words out of Norm's mouth, how is it a deus ex machina? Are we just jealous that their god is real and ours aren't? You are poking holes in something that makes perfect sense - objectively.

The toruk attacks Jake and Neytiri. Its name means "last shadow" because it is the "last shadow you ever see," and this is told by a na'vi, which means it kills na'vi. The thanator shows up at the end and she looks scared, because typically something like that would kill and eat her. 

How does their connection let the domineer everything? Do we domineer horses by putting saddles on them? Domestication seems to exist on Pandora.. also, you can't bond with anything unless it lets you.

Na'vi also use their braid for mating.. so everything else possibly could as well, which makes it basically necessary to keep them around. 

They didn't call Tatooine's moons anything. As far as the english names of a few things being "lame," who gives a fuck? Literal translations are always lame. What else would they have called the trees? They could have taken a page from Blizzard's book I guess and called them the Soultree and Worldtree.



To call District 9 a commentary on anything is pathetic. District 9 = District 6. Forced evictions are pretty much a copy-paste of real apartheid events and it makes no deeper commentary on anything, except that blacks in South Africa would have had nothing to worry about if some aliens came along to bother everyone instead. Any promise the movie had is squandered as soon as it reaches its second half, which is just a big chase scene (and a weak one at that).. not to mention the main character is an _idiot,_ the fate of one of the villains is left completely up to your imagination (did he live through that explosion or what?) and while you respect that movie for showing the height of human greed, you don't realize that Avatar did the same thing? 
Actually, all the messages you attribute to District 9 are made in Avatar as well


----------



## Arminius

Spoiler



I just figured out how to type in green stuff, awesome.


----------



## synrgy

sakeido said:


> Actually, all the messages you attribute to District 9 are made in Avatar as well



This. At least, that's how I read it all.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Sakeido rocks socks. You took the words right out of my mouth, El Duderino.

Just in case anyone doesn't know but there is a 200-something page book about the biology and science behind Pandora and its ecosystem. I'd recommend reading that before crapping all over how unbelievable the film is.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

One thing District 9 didn't have was hot alien side boob. I think we're overlooking the important things here people.


----------



## BigBaldIan

ZeroSignal said:


> Sakeido rocks socks. You took the words right out of my mouth, El Duderino.
> 
> Just in case anyone doesn't know but there is a 200-something page book about the biology and science behind Pandora and its ecosystem. I'd recommend reading that before crapping all over how unbelievable the film is.



Got it, read it. Now planning on running a tabletop Avatar RPG if I can find a suitable rules engine (how sad is that).


----------



## synrgy

JJ Rodriguez said:


> One thing District 9 didn't have was hot alien side boob. I think we're overlooking the important things here people.


----------



## ZeroSignal

BigBaldIan said:


> Got it, read it. Now planning on running a tabletop Avatar RPG if I can find a suitable rules engine (how sad is that).



+++BEGIN GAME+++

Every turn each player must roll a D6 and consult table:

1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
6 = Side boob - You have survived to the next turn.

Last man standing wins.


----------



## Arminius

BigBaldIan said:


> Got it, read it. Now planning on running a tabletop Avatar RPG if I can find a suitable rules engine (how sad is that).



That would be pretty cool. I've never played any of them but I know there are some generic role playing systems like GURPS.


----------



## BigBaldIan

ZeroSignal said:


> +++BEGIN GAME+++
> 
> Every turn each player must roll a D6 and consult table:
> 
> 1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
> 2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
> 3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
> 4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
> 5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
> 6 = Side boob - You have survived to the next turn.
> 
> Last man standing wins.



+ Repped for the laugh, we could eke it out to a D10 though.

1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
6 = Exopack fails - You are dead.
7 = Shot by pissed off Na'Vi - You are dead.
8 = Attacked by swarm of hellfire wasps - You are dead.
9 = Run into aerial jellyfish - You are dead.
10 = Side boob - You have survived to the next turn.


----------



## ZeroSignal

BigBaldIan said:


> + Repped for the laugh, we could eke it out to a D10 though.
> 
> 1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
> 2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
> 3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
> 4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
> 5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
> 6 = Exopack fails - You are dead.
> 7 = Shot by pissed off Na'Vi - You are dead.
> 8 = Attacked by swarm of hellfire wasps - You are dead.
> 9 = Run into aerial jellyfish - You are dead.
> 10 = Side boob - You have survived to the next turn.



You should change 7 to "...pissed off Neytiri" just for the hell of it. 

EDIT: Oh yeah! I forgot about those Medusa jellyfish things. I would have liked to see them in the movie.


----------



## phaeded0ut

On this one, I have to argue, why is it necessary to believe? ... He's rather done a fairly decent job of positing the why's and wherefore's of his dislike for aspects of one movie vs. another one. In a similar vein, I personally love the vast majority of Kurosawa Akira's movies. This is not at all the case for quite a number of folks out there. We're both correct for our own and separate reasons. No name calling, no rise in blood pressure and perspiration/frustration required.  

As was stated earlier, we all have different tastes in things, and this is what makes for a far more interesting and mutable world. 

The story has been done quite a few times


Spoiler



it's most commonly seen in Westerns, Cop and Robber flicks and the occasional current spy movie


 and the dialogue was lacking in my opinion. This movie was a director's opus; something the director has wanted to do for years, and finally technology has mostly caught up and he's been able to produce a very pretty (in my opinion) movie. I'd posit that Cameron will probably re-touch, change and add more to this movie over time, much the same way that Ridley Scott did with, "Bladerunner." I'd imagine that he'll do the same thing with the other two movies in the Avatar series, too. Somehow, there is a hope that James Cameron will treat his intellectual property of "Avatar" with more kindness than what was shown to the "Star Wars" movies (both trilogies).

To this end, I'm hoping that in the Blue-Ray release he'll have the cut scenes play out in sequence within what was released in the theatres. When these scenes are out of sequence from the rest of the movie, it's a bit more jarring for me as a viewer to put them into the context of which they were origionally intended.

Have to admit that I'll be a bit happier when Cameron starts working on something with karma being the central cause for what is occurring within the story; something with a bit more meat on the bones and quite a pallet of flavours, too. I'd be rather disengenuous if I didn't state that Kishiro Yukito is one of my favorite authors. Would love to see Neil Gaiman write the script on that project once the Avatar series is wrapped up.



BigBaldIan said:


> Got it, read it. Now planning on running a tabletop Avatar RPG if I can find a suitable rules engine (how sad is that).



I'd recommend using, "Savage Worlds." That's probably the easiest conversion of the bunch.


----------



## HammerAndSickle

^Great post. At the end of the day we all like something different, while I walk away from District 9 and think that was a great and important film somebody else walks out of Avatar feeling the same way. I also like Bullet for My Valentine


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

HammerAndSickle said:


> I also like Bullet for My Valentine



I think we found the problem.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

HammerAndSickle said:


> I also like Bullet for My Valentine


----------



## sakeido

BigBaldIan said:


> + Repped for the laugh, we could eke it out to a D10 though.
> 
> 1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
> 2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
> 3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
> 4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
> 5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
> 6 = Exopack fails - You are dead.
> 7 = Shot by pissed off Na'Vi - You are dead.
> 8 = Attacked by swarm of hellfire wasps - You are dead.
> 9 = Run into aerial jellyfish - You are dead.
> 10 = Side boob - You have survived to the next turn.



Let's make it a d20. This movie worked every portion of the boob, remember.

1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
6 = Exopack fails - You are dead.
7 = Shot by pissed off Na'Vi - You are dead.
8 = Attacked by swarm of hellfire wasps - You are dead.
9 = Run into aerial jellyfish - You are dead.
10 = You get a condition untreatable on Pandora and are euthanised - You are dead. 
11 = Your copter gets stuck in some vines and crashes - You are dead.
12 = Side boob. Next turn!
13 = Top boob. Next turn!
14 = Under boob. Next turn! 
15 = Cleavage. Next turn! 
16 = While distracted by boobs, you step off an inexplicably placed cliff - You are dead.
17 = You get a glimpse up Tsu'tey's loincloth - You are dead.
18 = Quaritch decides he doesn't like you - You are dead.
19 = Your spacecraft hits a speck of dust while en route to Pandora - You are dead.
20 = Whole boob! Level up!


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> Let's make it a d20. This movie worked every portion of the boob, remember.
> 
> 1 = Eaten by a pack of viperwolves - You are dead.
> 2 = Eaten by a thanator - You are dead.
> 3 = Eaten by a toruk - You are dead.
> 4 = Irradiated during solar flare - You are dead.
> 5 = Ran from a angtsìk's territorial display - You are dead.
> 6 = Exopack fails - You are dead.
> 7 = Shot by pissed off Na'Vi - You are dead.
> 8 = Attacked by swarm of hellfire wasps - You are dead.
> 9 = Run into aerial jellyfish - You are dead.
> 10 = You get a condition untreatable on Pandora and are euthanised - You are dead.
> 11 = Your copter gets stuck in some vines and crashes - You are dead.
> 12 = Side boob. Next turn!
> 13 = Top boob. Next turn!
> 14 = Under boob. Next turn!
> 15 = Cleavage. Next turn!
> 16 = While distracted by boobs, you step off an inexplicably placed cliff - You are dead.
> 17 = You get a glimpse up Tsu'tey's loincloth - You are dead.
> 18 = Quaritch decides he doesn't like you - You are dead.
> 19 = Your spacecraft hits a speck of dust while en route to Pandora - You are dead.
> 20 = Whole boob! Level up!



21 =


----------



## sakeido

how about Planet Earth, as narrated by Sigourney Weaver, except about Pandora?

watch in HD!


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

God damnit, that made me want to go see it again


----------



## sakeido

I figure I will have to see it once more, in theaters. Just once, really  
I've spent a ton of cash seeing it in theaters already. I want a good DVD screener to come out for download.. I think after seeing this movie five times I've paid my dues


----------



## Marv Attaxx

ZeroSignal said:


> 21 =


this is epic 
Most badass movie character of the year 
Holy crap, this thread is going strong!
Never seen a thread about a movie 30 pages long lol


----------



## BigBaldIan

ZeroSignal said:


> 21 =



That's the result of 18 on the dice roll I think.

Unless we go for D30 (yes they exist)

21 = Mauled but still alive. Next turn!


----------



## phaeded0ut

Come on, take the next step, percentile dice, baby!  Or base it off of "I Ching" in order to get some serious convolution going on the likes of which tablebastard can only hope to bring to a RPG.


----------



## silentrage

I have no idea what you're all talking about, but i assume it's great.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Side boob, Avatar, and D&D.


----------



## JakeRI

sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I had every indication that much of Pandora's wildlife was the product of intelligent design, probably guided by Eywa. And then the network bit.. how else would you explain that? Our consciousness is an emergent quality of our neurons. If Pandora is connected in the same manner, then would it not possibly be sentient too?
> 
> The ecosystem doesn't serve the na'vi. They are a part of it. Did you not notice that predators had no problems going after na'vi? They are food.. just like everything else. This part of the movie was the most blatant na'vi = natives. I thought we learned all about how natives fit into the environment back in school? Of all your criticisms, this one is the most disingenuous.
> 
> Most things on earth can be traced back to common ancestry. Since the network on Pandora is evidently quite important, it would be a desirable biological trait to keep the hair tendrils around, so everything ended up with them. In some cases they seem to be vestigial but quote the guidebook.. "there is little evolutionary pressure" on Pandora so most everything has kept the tendrils.
> .



Sorry to go back to this, but i believe i read that cameron worked with some scientists to ensure that all life on pandora had a "darwinian" quality. for example, everything (sans Na'vi) had 6 limbs for an actual evolutionary purpose, even though it is not disclosed. little interesting fact

What i personally got from the movie's spirituality/science:



Spoiler



One of the main reasons this movie hit home for me was the spirituality. I am an atheist. I don't believe in god, or anything supernatural for that matter. However the idea that we are all part of the same fundamental energy (E=MC2 anyone?) is not outside the walls of science. So this 'collective unconscience energy' that exists maybe be personified as Eywa, and Eywa helps keep the balance (entropy) but does not take sides. And suppose it really is possible, through some spiritual something, to be able to tap into this collectiveness in a very natural, non-supernatural way. The Na'vi display that ability, and they do it in a way you would expect; by really coming to understand and respect all life. These are some beliefs I hold very dear to me. They are partly responsible for my vegetarianism, my anti-war stance, and my eco-friendly lifestyle (although nothing is truely eco-friendly now a days). While in Avatar Eywa could very well actually be a deity in the truest sense (and probably is), it is left open. So when I watch Avatar I watch this spiritual world that I feel truly does exist. It is a godless world, but it is very spiritual none-the-less. So Cameron has, at least in my eyes, created a world that actually does exist. And while I'm not here to convince you that it is true (after all, I would need more then a paragraph to really explain these kind of existential thoughts) I hope that can help show everyone another angle to look at the movie.





Scar Symmetry said:


> Aye  Props for noticing the Troy motif. There was also a very similar motif to Titanic in the later, more emotional parts of the film. + rep



yeah, thanks. as soon as i heard it it stuck out, so on the ride back i put on the troy score on my ipod and sure enough. I noticed a couple of the titanic things too.

also, there is the obvious My Heart Will Go On (celine dion)= I See you(leona lewis)

non the less i still liked the score. Climbing Up Iknimaya - The Path To Heaven'' is still epic (although simple)

Horner worked with Cameron and an ethnomusicologist to discuss the culture of the Na'Vi, and then create a music culture for them, and then have the score (sans I See You) be a direct representation of that music culture. they didnt fuck around. horner just pulled a few motifs from his bag because he obviously thought they fit


----------



## ZeroSignal

JakeRI said:


> What i personally got from the movie's spirituality/science:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> One of the main reasons this movie hit home for me was the spirituality. I am an atheist. I don't believe in god, or anything supernatural for that matter. However the idea that we are all part of the same fundamental energy (E=MC2 anyone?) is not outside the walls of science. So this 'collective unconscience energy' that exists maybe be personified as Eywa, and Eywa helps keep the balance (entropy) but does not take sides. And suppose it really is possible, through some spiritual something, to be able to tap into this collectiveness in a very natural, non-supernatural way. The Na'vi display that ability, and they do it in a way you would expect; by really coming to understand and respect all life. These are some beliefs I hold very dear to me. They are partly responsible for my vegetarianism, my anti-war stance, and my eco-friendly lifestyle (although nothing is truely eco-friendly now a days). While in Avatar Eywa could very well actually be a deity in the truest sense (and probably is), it is left open. So when I watch Avatar I watch this spiritual world that I feel truly does exist. It is a godless world, but it is very spiritual none-the-less. So Cameron has, at least in my eyes, created a world that actually does exist. And while I'm not here to convince you that it is true (after all, I would need more then a paragraph to really explain these kind of existential thoughts) I hope that can help show everyone another angle to look at the movie.





Same here, dude. (except for the vegitarianism) Weird, eh? It's one of the reasons I adore Cynic's music so much. There always seems to be _more_ to it on a spiritual level, but without being a tree-hugging stoner hippy.


----------



## phaeded0ut

Have to admit that I would've been a bit happier with either Peter Gabriel, Hans Zimmer or Graeme Revell working on the "origional music" for the movie.


----------



## synrgy

phaeded0ut said:


> Have to admit that I would've been a bit happier with either Peter Gabriel, Hans Zimmer or Graeme Revell working on the "origional music" for the movie.



Forgive my ignorance and the OT, but: Does PG do soundtrack work? I didn't know that. What films has he worked on?


----------



## phaeded0ut

Carl!, yes, he's worked on the following films (and IMDB is probably missing a few):
Peter Gabriel

"The Last Temptation of Christ" and "Rabbit-Proof Fence" are two of my favorites. Never could quite get into, "Birdy." Check 'em out.


----------



## AbstractAsylum

Okay, I have a few points to get across.

I am not a conformist. I'm not a non-conformist, but I'm very outside of pop culture. I live a pretty simple life with my guitars and metal...and I'm not a big movie fan; I like to read a lot more. So when somebody invited me to go see Avatar, I naturally went "what's that?". Well, I looked up some trailers, and it seemed pretty damn corny. Glowing blue CGI characters, futuristic military on a sci-fi planet...I didn't want to go see it. But I went with the kids who invited me. (My friendship with them is kind of rocky, and I decided going might help patch it up a bit.) Plus, if I hadn't gone, I just would've sat at home all day. So I went, and...

Holy. Shit.

I really, really, really liked it. The CGI is extremely realistic, so don't worry about that. It blends in perfectly with any real action, and is seemless and definitely not distracting at all. It enhances the feel of the movie. The acting is awesome and avoids being cheesy, and the soundtrack blew me away (not perfect, and a little more "Titanic" than jungle in some parts, but amazing). The story was cool, and it had me gripping my seat numerous times when something went wrong, my throat clenched and heart speeding up. There were so many beautiful scenes...I forgot to breathe so many times because I was in awe at the absolute grandeur of the whole entire fucking planet.

Even the "flat" characters in this movie were well-scripted and fleshed out, giving it less of a kid's movie feel and more of an epic. There is a clear environmental message that came across quite well for me...not so much in the sense that we're going to go to other people's planets and destroy everything, but in a "look at how complicated we've made our simple planet" way. For some skeptics, it might come across as too tree-hugging.

I feel like people shoot down this movie to be "non-conformist" before they've seen it, which is exactly what I did. People don't want to be tree-huggers, and no one on this forum wants to be into pop culture. I mean, the trailers and hype made it seem like absolute hippie horseshit, and there's been so much hype. DON'T do this. Go and see it.


I didn't read through this thread, and I know some people are probably trolling it, and for those who have been planted with seeds of doubt, IMDB does not lie:

IMDb Top 250

#25 on the top 250 movies list.


----------



## Arminius

Just ordered the biology book, can't wait. 

Rather decent review from an educated sounding fellow. Don't actually know where this is from though.



> Historically, movie directors have had their asses kicked by
> astronomers as far as taking us to exotic worlds. For the most part,
> movie planets look like an extreme form of Earth -- they almost always
> have an oxygen atmosphere at an Earthlike pressure and gravity. Movie
> planets don&#8217;t even come close to matching the diversity of worlds in
> our solar system: the surface of Io is a mottled, sulfurous
> orange-yellow, constantly being repaved by volcanoes shooting hundreds
> of miles into the sky. Titan has a thick smog atmosphere that blots
> out the sun and rains hydrocarbons. Mars has planet-wide dust storms
> and a 17-mile-high volcano that nearly reaches above the atmosphere.
> Venus has a crushing, choking sulfur dioxide atmosphere with a
> pressure 92 times that of earth, and a temperature that can melt lead.
> Enceladus shoots ice geysers into space. And the real Pandora orbits
> within the rings of Saturn. These are only a few of the hundreds of
> planets, minor planets, and moons in our solar system: we&#8217;ve
> discovered hundreds elsewhere in the galaxy, some of which seem even
> crazier: super-Earths, nearly boiling puffed-up Jupiters, and objects
> that may be free-floating rogue planets without a star.
> 
> So I can&#8217;t think of a better use for 3d and a few hundred million
> dollars of effects than filmmakers starting to raise the bar to
> finally approach the awesome reality of nature. Due to the limits of
> budgets, finances, and creativity, I can&#8217;t think of another film that
> has attempted something near the scale of what Cameron has done here.
> 
> I&#8217;ll address the different aspects of the science in sections.
> 
> 
> FLORA AND FAUNA
> 
> From a visual perspective, Avatar&#8217;s Pandora is breathtaking. While
> most movies have only hinted at the exotic nature of their worlds with
> an establishing matte painting or two, here Cameron takes us on an
> elaborate three-dimensional tour though various habitats, from the
> treetops to the forest floor. He&#8217;s created a whole ecosystem, from
> semi-intelligent trees to giant land and air creatures. Most seem
> inter-related via symbiotic relationships. In fact, Cameron has taken
> the Gaia hypothesis, that the biosphere of the Earth is itself a kind
> of living entity, and sexed it up &#8211; the biosphere of Pandora is
> essentially a god, and it&#8217;s networked! Creatures can plug into each
> other via what amounts to USB hair and fiber optic roots. While some
> of these ideas are not without their faults (see below), Cameron gets
> points for creativity &#8211; this is true science fiction, not space opera.
> 
> I do have one minor complaint, that given their networking abilities,
> the Na&#8217;vi should not be so technologically inferior to the humans. On
> Earth, the largest barrier to technological progression was that
> information that existed in the brains of primitive humans could not
> be easily shared or preserved. As soon as writing was developed,
> suddenly it was possible to store information outside of the brain,
> and record and build upon knowledge. The knowledge available to a
> human or tribe went from one brain&#8217;s worth (and a minimal amount of
> oral tradition), to thousands, and ultimately billions of brains&#8217;
> worth. The result was a technological and social explosion. Hominids
> have had technology like spears for about half a million years, but
> only 7,000 years after the development of writing we had left the
> planet. And the sharing of knowledge is still undergoing a revolution
> with the development of the internet. Now we have instantaneous
> access to the combined knowledge of the entire history of humanity.
> 
> Since the Na&#8217;vi have had the ability to download information and share
> it in a massive network for long periods of time (evolutionary
> timescales), they should be way ahead of us in terms of technological
> development. Still, I have to give Cameron a pass here. It is
> thematically necessary that the Na&#8217;vi are technologically primitive,
> and their root-network is necessary to the plot. Maybe you could say
> that they could have evolved more technology, but they don&#8217;t need it
> or want it. Still, that reeks of the &#8220;Noble savage&#8221; idea, and I have
> to agree with Stephen Pinker that that is a bunch of hoo-ha.
> 
> But my major complaint from an evolutionary standpoint is that there
> is no way in hell that life on Pandora would evolve to look so similar
> to Earth life: there are humanoids, space horseys, hammerhead
> rhinoceri, and pseudo-pterodactyl beasties. And to make it worse,
> they have DNA, and the DNA is close enough to our own that Na&#8217;vi and
> human DNA can be combined! Again, I have to give Cameron a pass.
> First, it is easier for the audience to relate to familiar things.
> And more than that there is a significant plot point that I won&#8217;t
> spoil towards the end of the film that hinges on humans and Na&#8217;vi
> having similar DNA.
> 
> One way out of both my evolutionary nitpicks is the panspermia
> hypothesis -- that life in the galaxy was seeded in multiple places by
> an advanced civilization. But even then the odds against evolution
> producing such similar animals on different planets is astronomical.
> Since we have a clear record of evolution on Earth, some civilization
> would have had to keep taking specimens from earth, first
> pterodactyls, and ultimately humans (after they evolved), and then
> would have had to deliver them to Pandora, possibly modified via
> genetic engineering. That would be an interesting sequel: humans and
> Na&#8217;vi come together to confront their godlike humanoid ancestors!
> 
> Grade on astrobiology: A for the scale of the ecosystem, C for being
> too much like Earth &#8211; call it a B overall.
> 
> WORLD AND STAR SYSTEM
> 
> Pandora is a moon of Polyphemus, a fictional gas giant orbiting Alpha
> Centauri A. I&#8217;ve always wanted to know what the view would be from
> the moon of a gas giant. Can you imagine a quarter of the sky being
> taken up by a massive cloud-covered planet visible night or day? We
> get to see it in Avatar, and since Jupiter is the king of the gods,
> maybe majestic is an appropriate word to describe it. I wonder if
> Cameron&#8217;s choice to set this on the moon of a gas giant wasn&#8217;t a slap
> in the face to Lucas, as if to say &#8220;this is RETURN OF THE JEDI done
> right.&#8221; (I know it is ambiguous in the Star Wars universe whether or
> not Endor orbits a gas giant.)
> 
> But what had me really geeking out is the choice of the star system.
> Alpha Centauri A is perfect. First, as the closest star system to the
> sun (4.37 light years), it may well be the first star we travel to.
> Second, it is familiar in that you can see it with the naked eye if
> you live in the southern hemisphere &#8211; it is the brightest star in
> Centaurus. Actually, what appears to be a single star can be resolved
> as a binary system if you use a telescope. It is Alpha Centauri A, a
> bit more massive than the sun (1.1 solar masses), and Alpha Centauri
> B, a bit less massive than the sun (0.9 solar masses). The choice of
> G-type stars near the mass of the sun is great &#8211; they last for
> billions of years &#8211; plenty of time for life to evolve. They are in an
> elliptical orbit around a common center of mass, which means they come
> together and drift apart over the course of one 80 year orbit. The
> two stars get as close as 11 astronomical units (an AU is the average
> Earth-Sun distance; 11 AU is about the distance to Saturn), and get as
> far apart as 36 AU (about the distance to Pluto).
> 
> Would you see the companion star (Alpha Cen B) in the sky from
> Pandora? That depends on where it is in its orbit. At the farthest
> distance it would be a few hundred times the brightness of the full
> Moon as seen from Earth. But your eyes are logarithmic detectors, so
> it would actually only seem a few times brighter than we perceive the
> Moon. At its closest approach, Alpha Cen B would be a few thousand
> times as bright as we see our Moon. This is not all that bright &#8211; in
> comparison, on Earth the Sun is about half a million times brighter
> than the Moon. So on Pandora, if Alpha Cen B is up in the daytime
> then you might not even notice it, depending on how far away it is in
> the sky from Alpha Cen A. But if it is up at night (as it would be
> for half the year), it would never get completely dark &#8211; the sky would
> just be kind of dark blue.
> 
> Technically, there is a third star in the system, Proxima Centauri,
> but it is a tiny red dwarf a huge distance, about 12,000 AU, away &#8211; it
> is not even clear it is bound to the system. At any rate, it would
> not be prominent in the sky as seen from Pandora. Incidentally, my
> first job as a graduate student was to help calibrate the fine
> guidance sensors on the Hubble Space Telescope to help my advisor look
> for planets around Proxima Centauri. Sadly, we didn&#8217;t find any.
> 
> It is an interesting question as to whether planets around either
> Alpha Cen A or B could exist in stable orbits that would last for
> billions of years. You might think they couldn&#8217;t because the gravity
> of the other star would perturb any forming planet.
> However, simulations show that at least at Earth-like distances,
> stable planets can form in that system.
> 
> Grade for astronomy: for the choice of star system, setting in on a
> moon, and around a gas giant, Cameron gets an A+.
> 
> THE STAR&#8217;S EFFECT ON LIFE
> 
> Electromagnetic radiation comes in many forms, gamma rays, x-rays,
> ultraviolet, visual, infrared, and radio. Our eyes evolved to see in
> the narrow range that the sun has its peak output -- the visual band
> -- and the flora and fauna of Earth evolved pigments and colors that
> work at these wavelengths. But this isn&#8217;t universal -- some animals
> can see a narrower region of the spectrum than us, and others see
> farther into the ultraviolet or infrared. Our cornea blocks most UV
> light, but bees, for example, don&#8217;t have one and can see farther into
> the UV. They can see patterns in flowers that we can&#8217;t.
> 
> In fact, colors are really something manufactured in our brain &#8211;
> physically colors are just different wavelengths of light ranging
> uniformly from short wavelengths (violet) to long (red). What we see
> as blue or green or red helps us differentiate sky from grass from
> blood, but to a creature from another world, all these things might
> appear as the same color. In fact, you could imagine that bats might
> use echolocation to &#8220;see&#8221; rough surfaces as one color and smooth
> surfaces as another. So since colors are something created by our
> brains and not intrinsic to the universe (only wavelengths of light
> are), it is virtually certain Pandorans would see color differently
> than we do.
> 
> Alpha Cen A has almost the same temperature as the Sun, but it is just
> a bit hotter. As a result, the star puts out most of its light at
> visual wavelengths just like the Sun. But the star&#8217;s output is only
> part of the story &#8211; the oxygen and ozone in our atmosphere block much
> of the ultraviolet light from the Sun, and water vapor blocks some of
> the infrared light. Pandora doesn&#8217;t have an oxygen atmosphere (if the
> movie mentioned what gasses it contains, I didn&#8217;t catch it), so we
> might expect more of the ultraviolet light to reach the surface. The
> creatures there might be able to see farther into the ultraviolet.
> There might be all kinds of patterns that the inhabitants of Pandora
> can see that just look blue to us. Maybe that&#8217;s which there are so
> many blue colors in the film. To take this a step farther, I would
> have loved to see a scene where a character sees beautiful colors or
> patterns as an Avatar, only to have this beauty evaporate into a
> uniform sea of blue when he sees the same vista with human eyes.
> 
> Another feature of Pandora adding to the ubiquitous shades of blue is
> that bioluminescence seems to be a staple of the ecosystem. As
> Massawyrm points out, this makes sense for a world that may spend days at a time
> shrouded in darkness. Remember that a day occurs when Pandora rotates
> on its axis. But it might take a month or so to orbit its gas giant,
> which we know looms large in the sky, and could blot out the sun for
> days.
> 
> Grade for the astrophysics: For the fact that this world doesn&#8217;t have
> an oxygen atmosphere, and the plausible use of color, A.
> 
> 
> PHYSICS
> 
> Since Pandora is a moon and is presumably smaller than the Earth, the
> gravity would be lower. This is alluded to in the film, and creatures
> do grow larger and survive falls from greater heights than you could
> on Earth. I wonder if Cameron dialed in a different gravity to the
> physics engine rendering everything. To my eye, for at least the
> human scenes, the gravity looked just like Earth gravity, but then
> again if the gravity is close the differences can be subtle.
> Virtually all science fiction movies feature planets with gravity at
> 1g, since, of course, until now, filming has always been done on
> Earth. Since here so much of the world was created inside the
> computer, I would have liked to see this aspect pushed a bit farther.
> 
> In one of my biggest pet peeves regarding the science of Avatar, there
> is one scene where the gas giant, Polyphemus, can clearly be seen to
> be rotating in the span of about a second or two. Let&#8217;s say it
> rotates about a degree out of 360 degrees in those 2 seconds. That
> means it makes one rotation in 720 seconds, or 12 minutes! Jupiter
> takes about 10 hours to rotate. So the gas giant in Avatar rotates
> about 50 times faster than Jupiter. Winds on Jupiter can exceed 100
> meters per second, so the winds on Polyphemus would have to exceed
> 5000 m/s &#8211; this is supersonic and clearly implausible. Here&#8217;s one
> case where Cameron opted for visual effect over realism, but to me the
> bargain isn&#8217;t worth it. It looks unrealistic and takes me right out
> of the movie. But I do like the look of the clouds on Polyphemus &#8211;
> they look like a cross between Neptune and Jupiter. The highlight is
> a giant storm resembling Jupiter&#8217;s Great Red Spot. That is
> particularly appropriate for Polyphemus, named after a mythological
> cyclops.
> 
> But my biggest beef in Cameron&#8217;s trading physics for visuals is those
> goddamn floating mountains. Seriously, floating mountains? How the
> hell do they stay up there? This is such an egregious flouting of the
> laws of physics that surely there is some reasoning behind it.
> 
> Between the fact that Pandora seems to be sort-of at 1g, the
> impossible rotation of Polyphemus, and the floating mountains, physics
> is one one area AVATAR gets a marginal fail on Copernicus&#8217; Law of
> Science Fiction. But on all the other aspects of science, Cameron
> gets either a pass or passes with flying colors.
> 
> The dream of interstellar travel will only become a reality far beyond
> our lifetimes. But I love the fact that today I can be deeply
> immersed in not just a plausible, but a compelling alien world just by
> putting on a pair of 3D glasses and visiting my local theater. Even
> if I have to drive 100 miles to see it in IMAX, that is nothing
> compared to interstellar distances! And I love that there is a
> filmmaker that plays more than lip service to the science in his
> films, stimulating discussion and thought about distant worlds among
> geeks everywhere. I was inspired to do astronomy after seeing STAR
> WARS as a kid. I&#8217;m willing to bet that a fair fraction of tomorrow&#8217;s
> astronomers will have decided to devote their life to the discovery of
> new worlds because of AVATAR.
> 
> Quote:
> Thanks for the enthusiastic response to the article. Thanks for all
> the emails, and it is nice to see some interesting discussion in the
> talkbacks (who knew?). A few updates:
> 
> People have sent links to several sources that explain many of the
> questions I had. One is the pandorapedia. Another is A
> Confidential Report on the Biological and Social History of
> Pandora. And people sent the script treatment. I have not read
> the entirety of that last one yet, but the first two are interesting
> reading.
> 
> Levitating mountains: As dozens of people have pointed out, the
> mountains supposedly contain unobtainium, a room-temperature
> superconductor. Superconductors expel magnetic field lines, and as a
> result magnets can levitate above a superconductor. Here
> superconducting mountains are apparently levitating over the strong
> magnetic field of the moon or planet, or both. I had thought about
> some kind of mechanism like that but dismissed it for two reasons:
> (1) how could mountains form, stay in place, be weathered and shaped,
> etc. (2) if there is unobtanium in the floating mountains, why not get
> it there so as not disrupt the Na'vi. But I think I was just
> short-sighted. In the case of (1), the intention is that the
> mountains started out attached, but broke off and floated upwards at a
> certain point, and now they sort of float around. I buy that, at
> least enough for a cool movie scene. And for (2), maybe the
> unobtanium in the mountains isn't the right kind, or isn't pure, or is
> hard to mine. Interestingly, a geologist emailed me with another
> sighting indicating the strong magnetic field of the planet: the stone
> arches seen at the climax seem to be from mineral growth along
> magnetic field lines. Awesome.
> 
> Plenty of people have asked where the water comes from for the
> waterfalls in the floating mountains. To me, it is just like a normal
> mountain, with the bottom missing. Where does the water come form in
> normal mountains with waterfalls: rain and snow. Yes there was tons
> of water, but have you ever been to Yosemite in the spring? When the
> snow melts it all comes down at once, and it is an impressive sight.
> 
> And this is a little out of the purview of this article, but plenty of
> people have also asked why the humans didn't nuke the planet from
> orbit. (A) maybe they didn't bring any -- the proverbial "somebody's
> gotta go back and get a shitload of dimes" problem, and (B) you people
> scare me! Why doesn't the US just nuke countries we don't like? That
> is not cool, man.
> 
> Planet rotation: Someone affiliated with the film who asked me not to
> name them (but who ought to know) says the planet rotation scene was
> intended to be time lapse. Brilliant. I'll have to see it again to
> confirm that, but I'd buy it, because I think there were other shots
> where the planet didn't seem to be rotating quickly.
> 
> Oxygen atmosphere: I said that Pandora doesn't have an oxygen
> atmosphere, but I was wrong about that -- it does, but it has other
> gasses that are poisonous to humans. Clearly Cameron, a fellow diving
> and deep sea enthusiast, thought of this, because the people only need
> simple gas masks to breathe, and not huge oxygen tanks.
> 
> DNA: The Pandorapedia says the Avatars don't have DNA, just something
> analogous so that you can map to it. Great! Although, from my
> memory, the movie implies they do have DNA. I'd need to see it again
> to be sure. Maybe the character explaining it knows as much about DNA
> as most people do and just got it wrong. If I had a nickel for every
> time I was at a partly and someone told me that they heard that "they"
> (meaning scientists) have broken the speed of light, teleported
> something, etc.
> 
> Interstellar travel: From the pandorapedia: "Mission Profile: 0.46
> year initial acceleration @ 1.5 g to reach 0.7 c; 5.83 years cruise @
> 0.7 c; 0.46 year deceleration; 1 year loiter in orbit around Pandora;
> Mission Duration: 6.75 + 1.0 + 6.75 = 14.5 Earth years. However,
> relativistic effects shorten the time onboard ship to slightly less
> than 6 years each way."
> 
> Hmm, I don't think that calculation is quite right, but it is close
> enough. To see, let's take the special relativistic part, the
> cruising speed. If ET is Earth Time, ST is Ship Time, v is velocity,
> and c is the speed of light, then ET=ST/SQRT(1-v^2/c^2). So
> ST=5.83*SQRT(1-0.7^2)=4.1 years for the cruising. Even if you assume
> there is no time dilation on the accelerating and decelerating parts,
> then the trip is only 5 years, not 6. Maybe they are including the
> hanging out on Pandora time. To do the calculation correctly I'd have
> to drop some GR on you bitches, and I'm too lazy and you'd be bored.
> 70% of the speed of light is a good figure though -- it is almost
> plausible! From what I've read of the ship technologies, they sound
> very well thought out too.
> 
> Eyes: One of those sources mentioned that some of the creatures have
> two pairs of eyes -- one visual, and one that sees in the IR for
> nighttime hunting. Sweet! This is not without precedent. We have
> two separately evolved "circuits" for vision in our brains -- one
> primitive automatic one and another one for conscious sight. Look up
> "blindsight," where people with damage to the latter circuit can't
> consciously see, but can catch a ball. And of course we have two
> types of cells for day / night vision in our eyes: cones that allow
> you to see color when there is plenty of light, and rods that allow
> you to see black and white only, but give you night vision. Try this:
> put an eye patch on while you are inside for about 30 minutes, then
> go out where it is dark and blink between your dark and light adapted
> eyes. You can really see the color difference. It is awesome.
> 
> Wow, it appears that many of my nitpicks about the science were
> actually taken into account by the filmmakers and there are answers.
> I'm impressed! Hats off to Cameron and company for getting all this
> right. I can't wait to use this film in my introductory astronomy
> classes.


----------



## GazPots

Late to the party (i know) but i finally got to witness this in 3d.


All i am going to say is one word.




VICTORY!


----------



## ZeroSignal

You think I would have got bored after the fourth time today but I actually plan on seeing this again in 3D. I find this confusing. I am in no way bored by this film. This has never happened before...


----------



## Prydogga

I'll box this one out so it doesn't mess with any of your viewing experiences if you haven't noticed it already, but this is the only thing bad I have to say about Avatar 



Spoiler



Sam Worthington's (Jake) accent sucks, it's not that it's bad it's just half of the movie he isn't using it, I would have thought they'd retake any parts where he went a little Aussie in his voice.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Spoiler



He's Australian? I didn't even notice.


----------



## Prydogga

Spoiler



Yeah, I think it might just be because I am as well that I notice it, because I'm around that accent all the time, but it bugged me a bit in the video logs.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Prydogga said:


> I'll box this one out so it doesn't mess with any of your viewing experiences if you haven't noticed it already, but this is the only thing bad I have to say about Avatar
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Worthington's (Jake) accent sucks, it's not that it's bad it's just half of the movie he isn't using it, I would have thought they'd retake any parts where he went a little Aussie in his voice.



Forgive me, but does anyone really care? It's the year 2154. Who knows what _language_ we'll be speaking, let alone accent. Also, his Australian accent is very strong so to counter it that much is a feat alone. It honestly never bothered me as much as Weaver's terrible line delivery.


----------



## Ben.Last

Worthington has a lot of potential to be a great leading man but he really does suck at hiding his accent. He did pretty good in Terminator but there were definitely a few parts where it slipped through in odd sounding ways.


----------



## Arminius

JJ Rodriguez said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> He's Australian? I didn't even notice.





Spoiler



Yeah I thought he was from brooklyn or something at first


----------



## Prydogga

ZeroSignal said:


> Forgive me, but does anyone really care? It's the year 2154. Who knows what _language_ we'll be speaking, let alone accent. Also, his Australian accent is very strong so to counter it that much is a feat alone. It honestly never bothered me as much as Weaver's terrible line delivery.



That's what I even said, he has the most ridiculous Aussie accent ever (coming from an aussie :lol) and I thought he was good to cover up, but for me, and I know a few other people it was kinda weird. Maybe it's just us.


----------



## timbaline

I saw the movie a while ago, and I really loved it. The story was your basic Cowboys vs. Indians, or Good vs. Evil, etc. I think what made it such a great movie was the directing, and the visuals, which were amazing.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Prydogga said:


> I'll box this one out so it doesn't mess with any of your viewing experiences if you haven't noticed it already, but this is the only thing bad I have to say about Avatar
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Worthington's (Jake) accent sucks, it's not that it's bad it's just half of the movie he isn't using it, I would have thought they'd retake any parts where he went a little Aussie in his voice.



Sam Worthington isn't Aussie, he's British! He just lives in Australia


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

I just watched an interview with Sam Worthington to see what you guys are talking about, but he doesn't have the worst Aussie accent I've heard (by far) from people on TV, or hell, even in person.

EDIT: Or British according to ScarSymmetry


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Where he grew up isn't that far from me actually.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> Where he grew up isn't that far from me actually.



Jayzus, Dave. I didn't know you lived in Australia.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

No he _lives_ in Australia, he was born and raised near me


----------



## Prydogga

> Biography for
> Sam Worthington More at IMDbPro »
> 
> 
> Date of Birth
> 2 August 1976, Godalming, Surrey,* England, UK *
> 
> Birth Name
> Samuel Shane Worthington


----------



## JakeRI

hey guys, lets talk about how awesome avatar was and not about accents. 

for example, it made 3/4 of a billion dollars

VICTORY


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Already? Fuck. Success indeed.


----------



## JakeRI

yeah. already.


----------



## Pauly

I got the Field Guide today. As others have said, honestly, if you enjoyed this movie, you *NEED* this book. Everything from why it's called Unobtanium (hint: a material with it's superconducting properties was thought not to exist in nature and be virtually impossible to create artificially, hence being unobtainable  ), potential Earth-saving applications of Pandoran flora and fauna, explaining the moon's ability to sustain life, and
much much more. Essential reading.







EDIT - Eywa is also talked about in a little detail.  

Also the book is written from the perspective of folk on Earth who want RDA (the megacorp 'Company') ousted and the Earth fixed and all that jazz. There's concept art of Earth which never made it to the film, as well as hints about how fucked up a planet it is (nearly all proteins humans consume are synthetic as most animal sources have been wiped out, for instance) and how Pandora is key to Earth's future. I have no idea if this was done deliberately in such a way as to hint at future movie developments or whatever, but it was pretty kewl.


----------



## Arminius

^Should get mine in a few days


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I gathered that it was called Unobtanium because it was unobtainable


----------



## BigBaldIan

Yup been reading mine for a few days now. It makes an excellent movei-geek coffee table book as well. Mates who enjoyed the film come round pick it up and have a leaf through.

As of December 30th, this the worldwide takings have hit the following All Time Worldwide Box Office Grosses. I can see Avatar taking the 2nd spot before it's run is out.


----------



## silentrage

Saw it, wished it was longer and developed some of the characters like


Spoiler



Weaver and Rodriguez's more so that it mattered when they died


, but other than that, EPIC.
IMAX tickets sold out for another week or so, but I WILL SEE IT IN IMAX!!!


----------



## BigBaldIan

Aysakh said:


> ^Should get mine in a few days



You won't be disappointed.


----------



## Arminius

silentrage said:


> Saw it, wished it was longer and developed some of the characters like Weaver and Rodriguez's more
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> so that it mattered when they died
> 
> 
> , but other than that, EPIC.
> IMAX tickets sold out for another week or so, but I WILL SEE IT IN IMAX!!!



fix'd


----------



## ZeroSignal

So, I'm going to see it for the 5th time in 3D on Thursday.


----------



## silentrage

Aysakh said:


> fix'd


 Damn, sorry I should've been more careful.


----------



## Arminius

Must see it again 

Actually, I decided to go watch Shirlock Holmes since my local theater didn't get Avatar, and was pleasantly surprised. I still would have rather seen Avatar again but whatever


----------



## JakeRI

Aysakh said:


> Must see it again
> 
> Actually, I decided to go watch Shirlock Holmes since my local theater didn't get Avatar, and was pleasantly surprised. I still would have rather seen Avatar again but whatever



yeah I saw SH. its was good, true to the SH style.

but that's off topic.

and its not avatar


----------



## Arminius

JakeRI said:


> and its not avatar


 














jk


----------



## sakeido

Avatar is now the 4th highest grossing movie of all time, having just passed Dark Knight's whole run in just three weeks. It is also the fastest movie ever to $1 billion worldwide. Only dropped 7% from last weekend to this one...  Fuck the haters, for real. James Cameron has done something truly spectacular here. 

BBC News - Avatar smashes $1bn box office speed record


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I went to the cinema to see Sherlock Holmes the other day but they only had seats at the front - FAIL.

I will see it at some point though


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> Avatar is now the 4th highest grossing movie of all time, having just passed Dark Knight's whole run in just three weeks. It is also the fastest movie ever to $1 billion worldwide. Only dropped 7% from last weekend to this one...  Fuck the haters, for real. James Cameron has done something truly spectacular here.
> 
> BBC News - Avatar smashes $1bn box office speed record



To be fair, you're talking worldwide gross. I would never promote the idea that domestic gross is all that matters but, in all honesty, certain types of movies do significantly better when translated to other markets than others. TDK wasn't even released in every country. It was simply a more cerebral film and I, personally, find it's domestic record much more amazing than what Avatar has accomplished. I'm not trying to tear down what it's accomplished, just adding a bit of perspective.


----------



## sakeido

How can people call the Dark Knight a cerebral movie when it has plot holes all over the place (huge ones), an endless series of contrivances to keep the movie going forwards, only one good performance, and then at the end it tells you exactly what it wants you to take away from it? 
The more I think about Dark Knight, the worse it gets. At first it seemed to be a pretty great movie but it went from being a 10... to an 8.. to a 6 at best, only because of Ledger's Joker. He is wasted on that otherwise crappy movie.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

sakeido said:


> How can people call the Dark Knight a cerebral movie when it has plot holes all over the place (huge ones), an endless series of contrivances to keep the movie going forwards, only one good performance, and then at the end it tells you exactly what it wants you to take away from it?
> The more I think about Dark Knight, the worse it gets. At first it seemed to be a pretty great movie but it went from being a 10... to an 8.. to a 6 at best, only because of Ledger's Joker. He is wasted on that otherwise crappy movie.





This post has so much win I don't think I can handle it...


----------



## JakeRI

a billion dollars is a billion dollars


----------



## Daemoniac

Well, I'm impressed that it's done as well as it has, it's a fair record.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Lern2swim said:


> To be fair, you're talking worldwide gross. I would never promote the idea that domestic gross is all that matters but, in all honesty, certain types of movies do significantly better when translated to other markets than others. TDK wasn't even released in every country. It was simply a more cerebral film and I, personally, find it's domestic record much more amazing than what Avatar has accomplished. I'm not trying to tear down what it's accomplished, just adding a bit of perspective.



Domestic for who, chief? 

You aren't the only English speakers out there after all... And surely because a movie translates better across the cultural divide makes it a better film, non?

And to be honest, TDK was a bit... meh. Entertaining... but lacking substance. There's too much Christian Bale in TDK for me to truly enjoy it.



Demoniac said:


> Well, I'm impressed that it's done as well as it has, it's a fair record.



Does that mean you're going to see it...?


----------



## Daemoniac

^ I still don't know. I'd like to see what the hype is about... sort of... but by the same token I'm just not even remotely interested in anything i've seen in the trailers, or heard from people who have seen it


----------



## JakeRI

Demoniac said:


> ^ I still don't know. I'd like to see what the hype is about... sort of... but by the same token I'm just not interested in anything i've seen in the trailers, or heard from people who have seen it



i will pay for your god damn ticket


----------



## Scar Symmetry

GO SEE IT NAO!!!


----------



## Daemoniac

Alright, alright. If I can scrounge up the cash, i'll go and see it.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

In 3D


----------



## Daemoniac

^ Like I said, if i can scrounge up the cashmonies, then I shall go and see it. In 3d too, just to appease you Avatangelists


----------



## Scar Symmetry

You shall be uh believa!!!


----------



## ZeroSignal

Demoniac said:


> ^ Like I said, if i can scrounge up the cashmonies, then I shall go and see it. In 3d too, just to appease you Avatangelists



That's the kind of thing that sticks... I like it...


----------



## Daemoniac

Well there you go, I added it as a tag


----------



## cosmicamnesia

samurai7drew said:


> From Wikipedia:
> 
> 
> 
> The storys protagonist, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), is a former U.S. Marine who was wounded and paralyzed from the waist down in combat on Earth. Jake is selected to participate in the Avatar program, which will enable him to walk. Jake travels to Pandora, a lush jungle-covered extraterrestrial moon filled with incredible life forms, some beautiful, many terrifying. Pandora is also home to the Navi, a sentient humanoid race, who are considered primitive, yet are more physically capable than humans. Standing three meters tall (approximately 10 feet), with tails and sparkling blue skin, the Navi live in harmony with their unspoiled world. As humans encroach deeper into Pandora's forests in search of valuable minerals, the Navi unleash their formidable warrior abilities to defend their threatened existence.
> 
> 
> Jake has unwittingly been recruited to become part of this encroachment. Since humans are unable to breathe the air on Pandora, they have created genetically-bred human-Navi hybrids known as Avatars. On Pandora, through his Avatar body, Jake will be able to walk again. Sent deep into Pandora's jungles as a scout for the soldiers that will follow, Jake encounters many of Pandora's beauties and dangers. There he meets a young Navi female, Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña).
> 
> 
> Over time, Jake integrates himself into the Na'vi clan, and begins to fall in love with Neytiri. As a result, Jake finds himself caught between the military-industrial forces of Earth and the Navi, forcing him to choose sides in an epic battle that will decide the fate of earth and the Na'vi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seems pretty cool to me.



...sounds to me like someone took the story from 'Pocahantes' (spelling?) and played a game of mad libs with it


----------



## Ben.Last

ZeroSignal said:


> Domestic for who, chief?
> 
> You aren't the only English speakers out there after all... And surely because a movie translates better across the cultural divide makes it a better film, non?
> 
> And to be honest, TDK was a bit... meh. Entertaining... but lacking substance. There's too much Christian Bale in TDK for me to truly enjoy it.



No. Translating better does not make it a better film. Look at the history of films that have made their money back "overseas." More often than not it's mindless action films due to the fact that there's less to be lost in translation. I realize that the US is not the only country made up of english speakers. That doesn't change my point.

Also, I'd be willing to place bets that time will be much much kinder to TDK than to Avatar. I'd love to live in the world where cinema is soooo great that anyone could, in their right mind, consider TDK a "crappy movie." Seriously, it may not be "the movie" for you(and this is more aimed at sakeido's comments than your own, Zero) but at least try to have some perspective. It's going to be viewed, critically and financially, one of the greatest films of our generation, whether you want to agree or not.

Again, I will state that I say that having now seen the movie, it is great, Cameron is one of my all time favorite directors. However, I don't think it's going to stand the test of time as much for being a great film as it is for the tech that it displays, despite overly gushy statements by some to the contrary.

Luckily, I don't live in a world where I have to love either Avatar or TDK(or any other movie, for that matter) unconditionally, at the expense of being able to enjoy any other movie. So, please, continue on with the discussion about how Avatar is victorious(I'll refrain from pointing out that crap like Twilight makes a shit ton of money, as well...or will I??)


----------



## Alien DNA

Saw Avatar the other day.....so awesome


----------



## Prydogga

Demoniac said:


> Well there you go, I added it as a tag



 rep  I added Victory, whoever added sideboob? Thanks


----------



## ZeroSignal

cosmicamnesia said:


> ...sounds to me like someone took the story from 'Pocahantes' (spelling?) and played a game of mad libs with it



Go watch the film, foo'.



Lern2swim said:


> No. Translating better does not make it a better film. Look at the history of films that have made their money back "overseas." More often than not it's mindless action films due to the fact that there's less to be lost in translation. I realize that the US is not the only country made up of english speakers. That doesn't change my point.
> 
> Also, I'd be willing to place bets that time will be much much kinder to TDK than to Avatar. I'd love to live in the world where cinema is soooo great that anyone could, in their right mind, consider TDK a "crappy movie." Seriously, it may not be "the movie" for you(and this is more aimed at sakeido's comments than your own, Zero) but at least try to have some perspective. It's going to be viewed, critically and financially, one of the greatest films of our generation, whether you want to agree or not.
> 
> Again, I will state that I say that having now seen the movie, it is great, Cameron is one of my all time favorite directors. However, I don't think it's going to stand the test of time as much for being a great film as it is for the tech that it displays, despite overly gushy statements by some to the contrary.
> 
> Luckily, I don't live in a world where I have to love either Avatar or TDK(or any other movie, for that matter) unconditionally, at the expense of being able to enjoy any other movie. So, please, continue on with the discussion about how Avatar is victorious(I'll refrain from pointing out that crap like Twilight makes a shit ton of money, as well...or will I??)



Touché on the action movies bit...

Consider the entire English speaking world, then:
USA -304,059,724

UK - 61,399,118
South Africa - 48,687,000
Canada - 33,311,389
Australia - 21,374,000
Ireland - 4,459,547
New Zealand - 4,268,600

Never mind all of these countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_where_English_is_an_official_language

That's a fair chunk of the exact same audience that would be in the "domestic" market that you are just disregarding.

The Batman films were a franchise, the Twilight films were a franchise, Star Wars was a franchise, Titanic and the second world war were historical events. Each of them has their own "fan-club", so to speak. Avatar had what? James Cameron? A man whose name had unfortunately become synonymous with Leonardo Di Caprio and sinking ships rather than Xenomorphs and The Governator. Sure, Avatar had a bit of viral hype thanks to the first trailer being released back in August but that was a total blip on the radar when compared with 90% of other franchise based films.

Say what you want about Avatar's staying power. The fact remains that I have seen TDK once and practically forgot about it until now and I'm going to see Avatar for the 5th time in 3D on Thursday. I'm not a fan-boy. I just don't get bored of seeing this film.  Mr Cameron has created something more interesting than just new "tech".



Prydogga said:


> I added Victory, whoever added sideboob? Thanks



You're welcome.


----------



## xmetalhead69

TO be fair its not surprising that it reached such a high gross so quickly considering that a large portion of its ticket sales are 3d, which is a few dollars more per ticket. and yeah that extra 3 buck per ticket = quite a bit when multiplied over however many tickets sold. Movie kicked serious ass though


----------



## ZeroSignal

xmetalhead69 said:


> TO be fair its not surprising that it reached such a high gross so quickly considering that a large portion of its ticket sales are 3d, which is a few dollars more per ticket. and yeah that extra 3 buck per ticket = quite a bit when multiplied over however many tickets sold. Movie kicked serious ass though



Consider that those 3 dollars actually go to the cinema to pay for the brand new projector to play the film and the glasses. It's only about 1.80 extra over here and .80 of that goes to the 3D glasses which repeat viewers don't need to pay.


----------



## phaeded0ut

I would say, if you can, try to check it out in IMAX 3D, you'll be pleasantly surprised.  Many scenes that were breath-taking before become vacuum inducing in a good way with IMAX 3D. 

Have to agree, I'm amazed to see this much "talk/chatter" over this movie and glad of it. Have a feeling that this will become a new IP (Intellectual Property) in the same vein as "the Dark Knight," and wouldn't be surprised to see novels and/or graphic novels coming out as a result. Also hope that Cameron really got a handle on his rights for this one, too. Here's where Lucas and Spielberg can actually teach him a few tips and tricks. 
On the latter part of a graphic novel, have to admit that I'd love to see Neil Gaiman or Allan Moore do the scripting and Charles Vess doing the artwork.


----------



## synrgy

ZeroSignal said:


> Consider that those 3 dollars actually go to the cinema to pay for the brand new projector to play the film and the glasses. It's only about 1.80 extra over here and .80 of that goes to the 3D glasses which repeat viewers don't need to pay.



That raises an interesting point that regularly makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

So a film made in 2009 makes more money than a film made in the 90's, or 80's, or 70's. I get that the 'total profit equals X', but I feel like they're not taking into account the average cost of ticket prices during the film's release, not to mention inflation and a ton of other factors.

When Titanic was in theaters, I think the average ticket price was about $6-8. A 3D ticket today is about double that.

I wanna know what the highest grossing film *relative to average ticket prices* is.


----------



## ZeroSignal

synrgy said:


> That raises an interesting point that regularly makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
> 
> So a film made in 2009 makes more money than a film made in the 90's, or 80's, or 70's. I get that the 'total profit equals X', but I feel like they're not taking into account the average cost of ticket prices during the film's release, not to mention inflation and a ton of other factors.
> 
> When Titanic was in theaters, I think the average ticket price was about $6-8. A 3D ticket today is about double that.
> 
> I wanna know what the highest grossing film *relative to average ticket prices* is.



Agreed. I'm not sure if they take it into account or not but it's worth mentioning that Avatar made that amount of money in the middle of a global recession and in the lead up to Christmas when not many Christian (majority) countries would have that much disposable income.

If anything, that makes it all the more impressive.


----------



## sakeido

synrgy said:


> I wanna know what the highest grossing film *relative to average ticket prices* is.



There are inflation adjusted numbers out there. Gone with the Wind made the equivalent of $1.5 billion - domestically


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I decided today: I'm going back to see it in 3D again. It has to be done.

Ruarc, did you end up seeing it again that 9th time?


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> I decided today: I'm going back to see it in 3D again. It has to be done.
> 
> Ruarc, did you end up seeing it again that 9th time?



Don't tempt me! And check the last page. I'm on number 5, boyeeee.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Well SOOOORRRYYYYYY for not being a mind-reader ( / thread-reader) 



I read up on Cameron today while I was bored at work. Both him and Ridley Scott are very interesting characters, their enthusiam for film is unparalleled.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> Well SOOOORRRYYYYYY for not being a mind-reader ( / thread-reader)
> 
> 
> 
> I read up on Cameron today while I was bored at work. Both him and Ridley Scott are very interesting characters, their enthusiam for film is unparalleled.



Apology accepted... 



Yeah. He's done quite a few interviews on YouTube and he really loves his cinema. They're worth looking up.


----------



## Ben.Last

ZeroSignal said:


> Go watch the film, foo'.
> 
> 
> 
> Touché on the action movies bit...
> 
> Consider the entire English speaking world, then:
> USA -304,059,724
> 
> UK - 61,399,118
> South Africa - 48,687,000
> Canada - 33,311,389
> Australia - 21,374,000
> Ireland - 4,459,547
> New Zealand - 4,268,600
> 
> Never mind all of these countries:
> List of countries where English is an official language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> That's a fair chunk of the exact same audience that would be in the "domestic" market that you are just disregarding.
> 
> The Batman films were a franchise, the Twilight films were a franchise, Star Wars was a franchise, Titanic and the second world war were historical events. Each of them has their own "fan-club", so to speak. Avatar had what? James Cameron? A man whose name had unfortunately become synonymous with Leonardo Di Caprio and sinking ships rather than Xenomorphs and The Governator. Sure, Avatar had a bit of viral hype thanks to the first trailer being released back in August but that was a total blip on the radar when compared with 90% of other franchise based films.
> 
> Say what you want about Avatar's staying power. The fact remains that I have seen TDK once and practically forgot about it until now and I'm going to see Avatar for the 5th time in 3D on Thursday. I'm not a fan-boy. I just don't get bored of seeing this film.  Mr Cameron has created something more interesting than just new "tech".
> 
> 
> 
> You're welcome.



I'm not disregarding anything, as I said in my previous post. What you're missing from my point is that there's more to "translation" than just language. Culturally, some thing just don't translate as well from one culture to another, regardless of language. Also, I'll ask just out of curiosity, do those numbers you quoted above include the number of non-english speaking in those countries(yes, including the US)? Say whatever you want, fact of the matter is that domestic(as in the country of a film's origin) grosses are the best indicator of that film's performance(especially when talking about US produced films as plenty of shit ones have historically, as I said, made their money overseas).

As for staying power, you're, again, misinterpreting the sentiment that I was expressing. Did I say that there was nothing to the film but the tech? No. I said that I'd be willing to wager that that's what it will be remembered for in the long term. I didn't actually say one way or another if I felt that was justified(although, I did say that I thought the film was great), merely that that would be the reality of things. I stand by that. 5 years from now, hell, even 2 years from now, Avatar is going to be relevent to most from a tech standpoint as opposed to a film standpoint.


----------



## sakeido

Who has the high score for Avatar viewings right now?
I'm at 5, and will be going twice more. At least twice more.



Lern2swim said:


> As for staying power, you're, again, misinterpreting the sentiment that I was expressing. Did I say that there was nothing to the film but the tech? No. I said that I'd be willing to wager that that's what it will be remembered for in the long term. I didn't actually say one way or another if I felt that was justified(although, I did say that I thought the film was great), merely that that would be the reality of things. I stand by that. 5 years from now, hell, even 2 years from now, Avatar is going to be relevent to most from a tech standpoint as opposed to a film standpoint.



Avatar is a movie that is comparable in every way to Star Wars, which on its own merits is not a fantastic movie. But, it captured people's imaginations. Some may say enslaved.. and Avatar will do much the same thing. We will be talking about this movie for a very long time, whether you like it or not. Longer than the Dark Knight, in any case, which has always been notable for just two things. 1) Its the best comic book movie. 2) Ledger's Joker is peerless. Also, he died.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Turn it into a competition, see who goes to see Avatar the most times!

My money's on Ruarc 



sakeido said:


> Avatar is a movie that is comparable in every way to Star Wars, which on its own merits is not a fantastic movie. But, it captured people's imaginations. Some may say enslaved.. and Avatar will do much the same thing. We will be talking about this movie for a very long time, whether you like it or not. Longer than the Dark Knight, in any case, which has always been notable for just two things. 1) Its the best comic book movie. 2) Ledger's Joker is peerless. Also, he died.



I personally find Iron Man better than The Dark Knight, which I thought took itself too seriously. Heath Ledger's performance was of course incredible, but the rest of the movie drags behind his electric performance IMO.

I fully agree about the Star Wars point  I would also bring up Jurassic Park too, that film just amazed me when I first saw it and I got the very same feeling watching Avatar - just more intense.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> Turn it into a competition, see who goes to see Avatar the most times!
> 
> My money's on Ruarc
> 
> 
> 
> I personally find Iron Man better than The Dark Knight, which I thought took itself too seriously. Heath Ledger's performance was of course incredible, but the rest of the movie drags behind his electric performance IMO.
> 
> I fully agree about the Star Wars point  I would also bring up Jurassic Park too, that film just amazed me when I first saw it and I got the very same feeling watching Avatar - just more intense.



Oh god. Cody is currently kicking my ass. He's one ahead of me.  I'll catch up though... Just you wait... 

Actually, now that you mention it, Iron Man was better than TDK.


----------



## sakeido

I agree 100%. 
The movie I've seen most in theaters is Avatar... #2 is Iron Man. I saw it opening day... the next day... and then the day after that  That movie was great fun, a joy to watch. I enjoy it quite a bit more than Dark Knight.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Yeah it was a fun movie!

I thought Star Trek was a fun movie too, but having got the DVD the second viewing wasn't as enjoyable. Still very watchable though 

Bring on Iron Man 2! Mickey Rourke and Robert Downey Jr. in the same film = fucking win.


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> I agree 100%.
> The movie I've seen most in theaters is Avatar... #2 is Iron Man. I saw it opening day... the next day... and then the day after that  That movie was great fun, a joy to watch. I enjoy it quite a bit more than Dark Knight.



The crazy thing is that I'm not a huge movie fan. I rarely go to the cinema and the most I've ever seen a film in the theatres is twice and they were usually out of convenience (friends going and inviting me along). Avatar is a different story though. I really love going to see this film


----------



## sakeido

Scar Symmetry said:


> Yeah it was a fun movie!
> 
> I thought Star Trek was a fun movie too, but having got the DVD the second viewing wasn't as enjoyable. Still very watchable though
> 
> Bring on Iron Man 2! Mickey Rourke and Robert Downey Jr. in the same film = fucking win.



Star Trek has moments of brilliance but then the ending... uuugh. Black holes suddenly work in a different manner? Sticking around and shooting all of your guns at a dead ship in what appears to be a lame setup for Scotty's classic "I'm givin it all she's got!" line? Running into Old Spock coincidentally? Yikes. Still a great movie with some really great characters. The new Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Sulu, Chekov... okay, everyone... are great.



ZeroSignal said:


> The crazy thing is that I'm not a huge movie fan. I rarely go to the cinema and the most I've ever seen a film in the theatres is twice and they were usually out of convenience (friends going and inviting me along). Avatar is a different story though. I really love going to see this film


Only movies I've seen more than one in theaters - Avatar (5 times), Iron Man (3 times), the first Pirates of the Carribean (twice), Dark Knight (twice, once in regular theaters for free then once more in IMAX). So I'm right there with ya  
I was worried after seeing Avatar so many times I would get tired of it, but I still get excited when I line up a time to go see it with someone else. And I still want nothing more than to watch it again as soon as I get out of my seat.


----------



## phaeded0ut

I have to agree, this isn't a Kurosawa film by any stretch (though there are a few of his vista shots and running shots)  I'd have to agree with Cody and a few others that this is the new "Star Wars" or "Bladerunner" if you like. Will it be remembered for it's enticing/engaging world? That remains to be seen. What kind of impact will the new 3D imaging/processing have on other films and again, the question is that it still remains to be seen (please, remember it has only been out for a few weeks). At this point, I think we can agree that this is a popular film in many different areas of the world. 
What will be interesting is to see what types of movies are generated as a result of, "Avatar." Will they be more action-oriented and less "alien" cultural exploration? Will they even switch to a different genre of film? (Personally, this is the test that adds more credence than not about a particular film's influence/staying power.)

I'm definitely slacking as I've seen it only twice, once in IMAX 3D and once in Digital 3D. Ruarc, you and several others have definitely got me beat! 

As for the cultural translation bit, I'd have to agree with what is being argued on this point, but it also has to deal with what level of society one might be within inside of those different cultures, too. Some of the translations for the dubbed vocal scripts are "interesting" in the subtle and not so subtle changes, to say the least. 

For a great example of this, watch "Ghost in the Shell" with the English Subtitles on for the English dub version and you'll notice some significant changes in the non-combat scenes. The English dubbed version is dumbed down relative to the Japanese script.


----------



## Arminius

I've only seen it twice T_T. Damn it. Definitely going again. I know exactly what you mean when you say you wanted to watch it again after it was over. If I would have been alone the times I've seen it I probably would have not gotten up.


----------



## JakeRI

there is a reason ebert calls avatar not just a movie, but an EVENT


----------



## george galatis

i wish i could live there -_-
just like that

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/.a/6a00d8341bf7f753ef011571f361f4970b-pi


----------



## Arminius

george galatis said:


> i wish i could live there -_-
> just like that
> 
> http://www.dailygalaxy.com/.a/6a00d8341bf7f753ef011571f361f4970b-pi




That brings me to another thing I really love about this movie. Most sci-fi films try to wow you with technology and stun the audience with huge manmade constructs, whereas Avatar just made a beautiful world full of life. (well, cgi life, but who cares)


----------



## george galatis

Aysakh said:


> That brings me to another thing I really love about this movie. Most sci-fi films try to wow you with technology and stun the audience with huge manmade constructs, whereas Avatar just made a beautiful world full of life. (well, cgi life, but who cares)



yeah! actually we live in shits! 

Alpha Centauri has 3 SUNS!!!!! (stars)


we have only one moon -_- this is shit!


----------



## ZeroSignal

JakeRI said:


> there is a reason ebert calls avatar not just a movie, but an EVENT



Who's ebert? And he's right.


----------



## BigBaldIan

ZeroSignal said:


> Who's ebert? And he's right.


 
rogerebert.com :: Movie reviews, essays and the Movie Answer Man from film critic Roger Ebert

Remember when Barry Norman used to do Film '9x for the Beeb? Well Roger Ebert is the U.S. equivalent. Normally for film reviews I trust him and Empire Online to be pretty spot on.


----------



## Arminius

george galatis said:


> yeah! actually we live in shits!
> 
> Alpha Centauri has 3 SUNS!!!!! (stars)
> 
> 
> we have only one moon -_- this is shit!




Oh believe me, if you look hard enough earth is pretty cool too. Usually if you get away from places that people have been.


----------



## Pauly

start [Pandorapedia]


----------



## synrgy

I've only seen it once, but I'm hoping to go back and see it at *least* one more time before it leaves theaters.

As much as I hate to say it, I also thought Iron Man > TDK. Better paced, less glaring plot-holes, and no dead actors.

I've seen a ton of movies multiple times. It's my own way of influencing the film industry. I try to go see small independent films I know will be good, in the hopes that more will get made. I also try to go back and see the *really* good blockbusters more than once, for the same reason. All the Matrix, LOTR and Star Wars prequels/re-releases I saw more than once in the theater. I must have gone to see both Kill Bill movies (if you count both parts as one movie it's officially my all-time favorite) a minimum of 3-4 times each. A ton of other movies, too -- Iron man and TDK included.

Some movies just don't translate to the small screen. They're still good, but the experience is different -- not exactly 'immersive' from one's couch. Side note, spell check doesn't like the word immersive. Fail.


----------



## george galatis

Aysakh said:


> Oh believe me, if you look hard enough earth is pretty cool too. Usually if you get away from places that people have been.




maybe  but pandora it's the coolest satellite i've seen (in cinema)
but ok always tv provides the coolest things.....

(by the way also look the TITAN - SATURN'S satellite 




Pauly said:


> start [Pandorapedia]



 thank you for the video pauly!


----------



## ZeroSignal

george galatis said:


> thank you for the video pauly!



Huh. I thought I posted that one already?


----------



## Rick

I saw it last night. It was decent but I won't be buying it on DVD. The special effects were badass but as my little brother said, it was "a futuristic Pocahontas."


----------



## Scar Symmetry

ZeroSignal said:


> Who's ebert? And he's right.



ONLY Roger Ebert, the most respected film critic in the USA


----------



## Ibanezsam4

i thought this was a fun movie to watch. but has anyone else encountered those people who treat Avatar as a spiritual awakening and that it changed their lives and who think we need more movies like this cuz then there would be world peace and stuff? like this movie is their 2nd coming of christ? 

i was told i had no heart because i thought it was a special effects spectacular but that the message of the movie had no real affect on me because i felt it was all a rehash. i thought it was a fun movie, but just that... a movie.... with the hottest blue colored female alien ever


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I felt really weird about perving on Neytiri until I a) saw this thread and b) found out James Cameron and Co. deliberately made her hot so as to make guys perve on her.

You got me Jim you fucker, you got me checking out a fucking CGI alien.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

What's wrong with hot alien CGI? I can't wait for fan art (porn) to hit the net. Rule 34 anyone?


----------



## Ibanezsam4

every time i saw her on screen running i caught myself looking for nipple... although i found it odd that kissing was a sign of affection on an alien planet


----------



## silentrage

There were many "odd" things, I have to admit it took a few leaps of imagination on my part to really immerse in the film, but i was ready and willing, lol.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

JJ Rodriguez said:


> What's wrong with hot alien CGI? I can't wait for fan art (porn) to hit the net. Rule 34 anyone?



Being attracted to something that isn't a real female disturbs me


----------



## ZeroSignal

Ibanezsam4 said:


> i thought this was a fun movie to watch. but has anyone else encountered those people who treat Avatar as a spiritual awakening and that it changed their lives and who think we need more movies like this cuz then there would be world peace and stuff? like this movie is their 2nd coming of christ?
> 
> i was told i had no heart because i thought it was a special effects spectacular but that the message of the movie had no real affect on me because i felt it was all a rehash. i thought it was a fun movie, but just that... a movie.... with the hottest blue colored female alien ever



I don't think that this was a spiritual awakening for me, although I do feel that the film promotes positive spirituality. It has not changed how I spiritually feel about things but it has reinforced it. Take the ecological aspect of the film: Avatar put a very literal link between all living things that can be taken as a parallel to our Earth.

The cinematography, character and creature design, directing and production were all outstanding and stunningly beautiful. The emotion in the film is very powerful. It pulls you to joy and exhilaration, and then down to deepest of tragedy. If you can't experience that then you are missing the entire point of the film, I think.

The story might not be the most original, but then again Star Wars simply lifted it's story and characters from Westerns and Samurai films. Nothing is truly original any more. What Avatar has done is taken a very simple and solid story, couple it with a fantastical yet believable world and it allows you to immerse yourself in the story, the adventure and the emotion.

I _love_ this film. 

Also, giant, blue, glow in the dark Zoe Saldana for the win.  But seriously, I hope she wins best actress because she is easily one of the best actresses in Avatar. _Especially_ during the freak-out scene.


----------



## Ibanezsam4

Scar Symmetry said:


> Being attracted to something that isn't a real female disturbs me



she's real is the sense that she exists in a computer and is comprised of 1s and 0s


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> I felt really weird about perving on Neytiri until I a) saw this thread and b) found out James Cameron and Co. deliberately made her hot so as to make guys perve on her.
> 
> You got me Jim you fucker, you got me checking out a fucking CGI alien.





JJ Rodriguez said:


> What's wrong with hot alien CGI? I can't wait for fan art (porn) to hit the net. Rule 34 anyone?





Ibanezsam4 said:


> every time i saw her on screen running i caught myself looking for nipple... although i found it odd that kissing was a sign of affection on an alien planet





Scar Symmetry said:


> Being attracted to something that isn't a real female disturbs me









"We have failed to uphold Brannigan's Law. However I did make it with a hot alien babe. And in the end, is that not what man has dreamt of since first he looked up at the stars? 
...Kiff, I'm asking you a question."


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Scar Symmetry said:


> Being attracted to something that isn't a real female disturbs me



I'd hump a shoe if you put good enough side boob on it.


----------



## synrgy

Dear Washington DC metro-area,

I am officially done with you being such an asshole about IMAX theaters. We have something like 10 "IMAX" screens accessible in the area. The problem is, there's a noticeable difference between a **real** IMAX screen, and what is simply an IMAX presentation being projected on a _regular size_ screen. 

Unfortunately, in this area you only seem to show feature films on the latter, and only use the **real** IMAX screens to show us educational documentaries.

I have just finished scouring the listings to see if any of our **real** IMAX theaters were playing Avatar, and they are not -- despite having shown plenty of love to the abomination that was Transformers 2. With all this in mind, I have concluded that you suck donkey balls, and I hate you.

Regards,
Carl!

*edit* PS -- That whole "We'll use an IMAX projector but project the image on a regular size screen" is absolutely false advertisement, and I hope someone holds you legally accountable for it.


----------



## Pauly

ZeroSignal said:


> Huh. I thought I posted that one already?




I think you did, but more content has been added since then.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Sorry to hear that, Carl. If it makes you feel any better the only Imax theatre we had closed several years ago. It would have been nice to see Avatar on such a massive screen. Have you considered going out of the state to get your fix? 



Pauly said:


> I think you did, but more content has been added since then.



Ah. Bump it whenever you find any new info, so.


----------



## sakeido

JJ Rodriguez said:


> What's wrong with hot alien CGI? I can't wait for fan art (porn) to hit the net. Rule 34 anyone?



Let's face it. In this forward thinking day and age, Asian, Latino and black women just aren't that exotic anymore. Green aliens (Star Trek) and sexy blue giantesses are just what we need right now.


----------



## george galatis

ZeroSignal said:


> Huh. I thought I posted that one already?



 ok what ever....


----------



## silentrage

I was just thinking, a human male doing it with a navi female might not be that awesome, granted they have huge tits, but they're probably pretty loose in the low end. Now, the other way around...

Come on female SSers, you know you're thinking it too.


----------



## ZeroSignal

silentrage said:


> I was just thinking, a human male doing it with a navi female might not be that awesome, granted they have huge tits, but they're probably pretty loose in the low end. Now, the other way around...
> 
> Come on female SSers, you know you're thinking it too.



Oh dear god.


----------



## synrgy

ZeroSignal said:


> Oh dear god.



Yes?


----------



## ZeroSignal

synrgy said:


> Yes?



Not you! The other one...


----------



## Pauly

Btw here's some fan art. No n00dz on DeviantArt but someone will doubtlessly be on it.


















Also, they need to make a replica of this Neytiri maquette one of the concept artists for the film did!

Gallery - Avatar


----------



## synrgy

Pauly said:


>



Walt Disney Presents: Avatar?


----------



## sakeido

I would buy the hell out of that statue, even though it would probably cost hundreds or thousands of dollars. My favorite pic is that third one


----------



## silentrage

Nah it wouldn't, any competent sculptor could do that for a couple hundreds to a few grands, McFarlane could probably mass produce it for under a hundred quid. I wouldn't buy one though, I have too many figures and now adays I prefer digital sculptures.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

silentrage said:


> I was just thinking, a human male doing it with a navi female might not be that awesome, granted they have huge tits, but they're probably pretty loose in the low end. Now, the other way around...
> 
> Come on female SSers, you know you're thinking it too.





JJ you asked what was wrong with this?


----------



## Daemoniac

ZeroSignal said:


> The cinematography, character and creature design, directing and production were all outstanding and stunningly beautiful. The emotion in the film is very powerful. It pulls you to joy and exhilaration, and then down to deepest of tragedy. *If you can't experience that then you are missing the entire point of the film, I think.*
> 
> The story might not be the most original, but then again Star Wars simply lifted it's story and characters from Westerns and Samurai films. Nothing is truly original any more. What Avatar has done is taken a very simple and solid story, couple it with a fantastical yet believable world and it allows you to immerse yourself in the story, the adventure and the emotion.



I just can't agree with that... At all...

What you (and everyone who is in love with the movie) seem to be incapable of understanding (or willing to put aside in your own minds) is that there *will* be people who simply aren't interested... Whether because of the design, the characters, whatever, the point is that they just aren't. That doesn't automatically mean the person is wrong and that they're just missing the point of the movie, nor does it mean the movie is crap. It quite simply means it was not for them  I mean shit, I can not think of a single movie that is loved by _everyone_. It's just not possible; there is *no* set of characters, *no* story, *no* design aesthetic that is universally appealing, nor is it possible to put every single possibility into one movie. So why would that be any different with this? 

For me it's the design. Granted I haven't seen it in cinemas (at all ), but I don't want to because frankly the design of the Na'vi and the world (to me) is boring...

As for the second part, I agree to an extent, but by the same token what Star Wars did was take teh archetypal theme of an entire generation and fast forward (rewind?) it to a place outside the realm of "Earth"... what Avatar seems to be doing though is not taking a full theme and reworking it but drawing parallels to individual movies (as mentioned; Pocahontas, Dances With wolves etc..), which is nothing akin to Star Wars...











 /rant... Demoniac prepares for the neg-reppings...


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Mischa, I agree with you about not any one film being universally accepted by everyone, but you definitely won't understand Avatar until you see it. Like Ebert said, it's not a movie, it's an Event. Either take part or don't  
If you watch it and _then_ don't like it, come back and bitch about all you want!


----------



## ZeroSignal

Demoniac said:


> I just can't agree with that... At all...
> 
> What you (and everyone who is in love with the movie) seem to be incapable of understanding (or willing to put aside in your own minds) is that there *will* be people who simply aren't interested... Whether because of the design, the characters, whatever, the point is that they just aren't. That doesn't automatically mean the person is wrong and that they're just missing the point of the movie, nor does it mean the movie is crap. It quite simply means it was not for them  I mean shit, I can not think of a single movie that is loved by _everyone_. It's just not possible; there is *no* set of characters, *no* story, *no* design aesthetic that is universally appealing, nor is it possible to put every single possibility into one movie. So why would that be any different with this?
> 
> For me it's the design. Granted I haven't seen it in cinemas (at all ), but I don't want to because frankly the design of the Na'vi and the world (to me) is boring...
> 
> As for the second part, I agree to an extent, but by the same token what Star Wars did was take teh archetypal theme of an entire generation and fast forward (rewind?) it to a place outside the realm of "Earth"... what Avatar seems to be doing though is not taking a full theme and reworking it but drawing parallels to individual movies (as mentioned; Pocahontas, Dances With wolves etc..), which is nothing akin to Star Wars...
> 
> 
> /rant... Demoniac prepares for the neg-reppings...



I'm not going to neg rep you, dude.

I never for one second assume that EVERYONE will love the film. I'm acutely aware that everyone has differing tastes in cinema. What I _was_ saying is that if you go to see explosions in 3D then you're going for exactly the wrong reason.

Although I'm okay with you saying that you won't go to the film for whatever reason I'm not okay with someone who hasn't seen the film comparing it, unfairly, to other films. If you want to bash the film, go and see it. Otherwise leave it out as it is very unfair to people who might potentially enjoy the film and be put off by your "rant".

I'm sure you can understand where I'm coming from.


----------



## Daemoniac

Scar Symmetry said:


> Mischa, I agree with you about not any one film being universally accepted by everyone, but you definitely won't understand Avatar until you see it. Like Ebert said, it's not a movie, it's an Event. Either take part or don't
> If you watch it and _then_ don't like it, come back and bitch about all you want!




That's fair, thanks.

I will see it so I can make that decision, just the way i've heard so many people talking about it is like it's the second coming of Christ... (and no less aggressive than the televangelists who spout it, I might add ), and it's especially annoying when they try and tell me how great the things I know for a fact i won't be interested in are (i have many close friends who WILL not stop ) but yes, I will see it.

@ Zero, I get where you're coming from, I will see it 

EDIT: For the record, I _can_ see how it will be a benchmark in cinematic history, and certainly a benchmark in new cinematic technology.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Demoniac said:


> That's fair, thanks.
> 
> I will see it so I can make that decision, just the way i've heard so many people talking about it is like it's the second coming of Christ... (and no less aggressive than the televangelists who spout it, I might add )





If I ever said it then I said it in jest, I can assure you. 

Just don't approach it negatively or you won't enjoy it. I mean, don't go in and think of it as a chore we set you. Go in to see what all the fuss is about and keep your mind open or don't go at all. I've been dragged to films before and I hadn't enjoyed them. You dig?


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Rick didn't like it but he's old


----------



## sakeido

Alright dude. If you are going to see it, at least go into it with an open mind. Saying "I know for a fact I won't be interested in it" and then going to watch it.. not really giving the movie a fair shot. 

But you definitely must see it, once, in theaters. If it comes out, you see it on TV some day and then go "Jesus, that was actually pretty good!" you will kill yourself for not seeing it on the big screen in 3D. That is not the main selling point of the movie for me (I actually get mad when people say "if you didn't like it, its becuz you didn't see it in 3D" god damn it, its not just the pretty pictures!), but it certainly was meant to be experienced like that.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Another good point


----------



## Daemoniac

ZeroSignal said:


> You dig?


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> Rick didn't like it but he's old



Rick
|
V


----------



## Daemoniac

^ That looks disturbingly similar to my Dachshund...


----------



## ZeroSignal

Demoniac said:


> ^ That looks disturbingly similar to my Dachshund...



It's Rick's Dachshund now. >_>


----------



## Daemoniac

ZeroSignal said:


> It's Rick now. >_>



Fixed.


----------



## _detox

Saw it a few weeks ago in 3D, and originally didn't want to post my thoughts because of the sheer amount of praise. 

I was originally impressed by the trailers that I saw beforehand, went in with rather high expectations, and I was let down. Of course, the cinematography was breathtaking, the 3D was certainly a milestone in film as well. I just didn't feel like the plot and the dialogue was on the same level as the visuals. During the part where the macho army guy was confronting the main character (I'm terrible at names) and the main guy is like, "It's over!" And then GI Joe is like, "It's not over as long as I'm still breathing!" I actually laughed rather loudly in the theater at that line.  

I enjoyed the experience, but I think that we'll be waiting a little longer until films with that kind of visual spectacle will have writing on the same level.


----------



## ZeroSignal

_detox said:


> Saw it a few weeks ago in 3D, and originally didn't want to post my thoughts because of the sheer amount of praise.
> 
> I was originally impressed by the trailers that I saw beforehand, went in with rather high expectations, and I was let down. Of course, the cinematography was breathtaking, the 3D was certainly a milestone in film as well. I just didn't feel like the plot and the dialogue was on the same level as the visuals. During the part where the macho army guy was confronting the main character (I'm terrible at names) and the main guy is like, "It's over!" And then GI Joe is like, "It's not over as long as I'm still breathing!" I actually laughed rather loudly in the theater at that line.
> 
> I enjoyed the experience, but I think that we'll be waiting a little longer until films with that kind of visual spectacle will have writing on the same level.



Well said, for the most part.

I'll always maintain that while the written dialogue is mostly adequate (some cases terrible, I'm looking at you Sigourney Weaver ), the delivery and quality of acting was mostly very good (some cases terrible, I'm looking at you again Sigourney Weaver ).

For instance, I thought Stephen Lang's delivery of the "nothin's over while I'm still breathin'" line had so much grit and hatred in it that it carried the otherwise boring line and made me almost punch the air with vicarious manliness. I do see where you're coming from, though.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

ZeroSignal said:


> Well said, for the most part.
> 
> I'll always maintain that while the written dialogue is mostly adequate (some cases terrible, I'm looking at you Sigourney Weaver ), the delivery and quality of acting was mostly very good (some cases terrible, I'm looking at you again Sigourney Weaver ).
> 
> For instance, I thought Stephen Lang's delivery of the "nothin's over while I'm still breathin'" line had so much grit and hatred in it that it carried the otherwise boring line and made me almost punch the air with vicarious manliness. I do see where you're coming from, though.



Agreed about the acting and the delivery 

There was some camembert stuffed in the script for sure, but I whacked that shit on a rustic roll and ate it all up.

Even though some of the lines themselves weren't great, the conviction in their delivery was spot on, from all actors.

I like what someone else said about they could've gone into more detail in character with Sigourney Weaver and Michelle Rodriguez, 


Spoiler



Both of their deaths seemed like an arbitrary choice on Cameron's part, given that we didn't have time to care about either of them.



I expect we'll be given all sorts of goodies and possibly a Director's Cut in the DVD/BluRay so it's possible the minor things we thought were missing could show up


----------



## silentrage

Scar Symmetry said:


> Agreed about the acting and the delivery
> 
> There was some camembert stuffed in the script for sure, but I whacked that shit on a rustic roll and ate it all up.
> 
> Even though some of the lines themselves weren't great, the conviction in their delivery was spot on, from all actors.
> 
> I like what someone else said about they could've gone into more detail in character with Sigourney Weaver and Michelle Rodriguez,
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Both of their deaths seemed like an arbitrary choice on Cameron's part, given that we didn't have time to care about either of them.
> 
> 
> 
> I expect we'll be given all sorts of goodies and possibly a Director's Cut in the DVD/BluRay so it's possible the minor things we thought were missing could show up



That was me, glad you think so, it couldve been so much more involving if you cared about all the characters, black, white and gray. 

And FIXED YOUR POST!!


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Dude I just realised and fixed it up sharp! I came into the thread to ask you to fix your quote but you already had so awesome!


----------



## Prydogga

Spoiler



*taking up space so hidden text doesn't show up on forumspy................EDIT:taking up more space blah blah blah blah blah blah, why should this be a spoiler anyway everyone should have seen this by now blah blah blah* 

I was actually geniunely sad when Rodriguez died, although yes, there should have been more development in here character, because I had no idea where she was coming from when all hell broke loose and she didn't fire, I thought she was just a grunt, and was surprised by her action, sort of in a bad way. Weaver's death was pretty meh.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Prydogga said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *taking up space so hidden text doesn't show up on forumspy................EDIT:taking up more space blah blah blah blah blah blah, why should this be a spoiler anyway everyone should have seen this by now blah blah blah*
> 
> I was actually geniunely sad when Rodriguez died, although yes, there should have been more development in here character, because I had no idea where she was coming from when all hell broke loose and she didn't fire, I thought she was just a grunt, and was surprised by her action, sort of in a bad way. Weaver's death was pretty meh.





Spoiler



Yeah, I was sadder about Trudy dying than I was when Dr. Augustine died. Mostly because Tsu'Tey had just died in such a tragic manner. Everything was in beyond Shakespearian tragedy mode. Whearas with Dr. Augustine it was almost more of a release. Plus, I didn't particularly like the character or Weaver's acting.


----------



## silentrage

Scar Symmetry said:


> Dude I just realised and fixed it up sharp! I came into the thread to ask you to fix your quote but you already had so awesome!



Yeah I fucked up.

On that note, I was rather perplexed having read a line that goes something like


Spoiler



jake's real body is dead


 a few pages back.

I thought that ruined it for me a little bit, but the good things is I didn't actually see HOW that was gonna go down until the very end, so it didn't diminish the film for me.


----------



## Arminius

ZeroSignal said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I was sadder about Trudy dying than I was when Dr. Augustine died. Mostly because Tsu'Tey had just died in such a tragic manner. Everything was in beyond Shakespearian tragedy mode. Whearas with Dr. Augustine it was almost more of a release. Plus, I didn't particularly like the character or Weaver's acting.






Spoiler



Tsu'Tey amd Trudy's deaths were really well done in my opinion. No cheesy "last moments of breath" or "stabbed through the heart at a gut wrenchigly slow framerate". They just died in like everyone else, and in a way that made their deaths even more tragic.


----------



## JakeRI

to get back to being perves, i saw it for the 4th time today. there is definitive nipples when Neytiri lies down in her hammock thing. (as well as other points of the movie)


----------



## Pauly

Two things worth pointing out. First, (and it's been said already but) the working title for this film was Project 880 because Cameron wanted to make a film that would appeal to the 8-80 age range. Thus you can make the excuse that to broaden the appeal he had to make some sacrifices, including the running time which was originally a fair bit longer (c'mon directors cut!).

Second, it's Cameron! His movies were never famous for their dialogue or fleshed out characters in the first place. Other films of his I love dearly like Aliens can be criticised for similar reasons.

Also, this is *spoiler-filled* but one of my fave YouTube philosophers I subscribe to did an Avatar video, worth listening to.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Pauly said:


> Also, this is *spoiler-filled* but one of my fave YouTube philosophers I subscribe to did an Avatar video, worth listening to.




DO NOT WATCH THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM.

Now that that's out of the way: holy crap that guy said exactly what I was trying to say and more. He did it in a very intellectual and well spoken way, despite his odd pronunciation.

     

Watch the film and then watch this video. If you still think the story is stupid then there is no hope for you.


----------



## JakeRI

Pauly said:


> Two things worth pointing out. First, (and it's been said already but) the working title for this film was Project 880 because Cameron wanted to make a film that would appeal to the 8-80 age range. Thus you can make the excuse that to broaden the appeal he had to make some sacrifices, including the running time which was originally a fair bit longer (c'mon directors cut!).
> 
> Second, it's Cameron! His movies were never famous for their dialogue or fleshed out characters in the first place. Other films of his I love dearly like Aliens can be criticised for similar reasons.
> 
> Also, this is *spoiler-filled* but one of my fave YouTube philosophers I subscribe to did an Avatar video, worth listening to.




spot on. shows you the value of good art


----------



## silentrage

This film needs more metaphors.


----------



## synrgy

I felt like it could use some more buttfors.


----------



## ZeroSignal

silentrage said:


> This film needs more metaphors.



Watch the above video, n00b... 

Or was that a joke...


----------



## Pauly

Yeah I did italic and underline 'spoiler-filled' haha. Stef's a really clever guy, check out his channel here YouTube - stefbot's Channel although it'll take forever to work through everything he's put out.

EDIT - this doesn't mean I agree with him on everything though! But yeah that particular vid was spot on I think.


----------



## silentrage

ZeroSignal said:


> Watch the above video, n00b...
> 
> Or was that a joke...



It's a joke young padawan.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

The dude in the videos sounds like Niles from Frasier


----------



## synrgy

Scar Symmetry said:


> The dude in the videos sounds like Sideshow Bob's brother.



fixed.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I think we're both right


----------



## ZeroSignal

silentrage said:


> It's a joke young padawan.



Shurrup... I'm tired... leave me alone... 

[action=]Sulks[/action]


----------



## K-Roll

not sure if this was posted, but after I saw this movie yesterday in 3d this makes perfect sense


----------



## phaeded0ut

Don't eat the green ones, they're not ripe yet...


----------



## mattofvengeance

K-Roll said:


> not sure if this was posted, but after I saw this movie yesterday in 3d this makes perfect sense



Yeah, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but what you just posted was absolutely awesome


----------



## ZeroSignal

Bad weather has scuppered my plans to go see Avatar today. I'm slightly miffed to say the least... :|

Maybe tomorrow, or Saturday...?

Also, wtf at the neg rep I got from my original post in this thread? 

"you are never on this site long enough to experience the common technical issue"

The hell?


----------



## Arminius

^ fix'd, due to the fact that you obviously are on this site enough to experience the common technical issue


----------



## ZeroSignal

Aysakh said:


> ^ fix'd, due to the fact that you obviously are on this site enough to experience the common technical issue



But... what if I don't know what the common technical issue is?

D:

Thanks, btw.


----------



## Arminius

ZeroSignal said:


> But... what if I don't know what the common technical issue is?



Apparently someone does, and the also apparently have been to this thread at least once, probably more, which means they quite possibly could be reading this, which means they quite possibly should post an explanation.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Aysakh said:


> Apparently someone does, and the also apparently have been to this thread at least once, probably more, which means they quite possibly could be reading this, which means they quite possibly should post an explanation.



I found out who it is and hilariously enough we haven't both posted in a thread together in months. It's not like we had an argument or something. Sounds like a simple trolling.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Who was it? Tell us tell us tell uuuuuuuuus!

I'm joking, I don't really care 

So, AVATAR then?


----------



## sakeido

I haven't seen it in a week and a half 
WHHHHYYYYYYYY

edit: Avatar is now the 2nd highest grossing movie of all time, having just blown past Return of the King in the middle of the week. How close will it get to Titanic? hmmm


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> So, AVATAR then?



Man... I'm getting withdrawal...


----------



## silentrage

ZeroSignal said:


> Man... I'm getting withdrawal...



Lmao, my bud got that after his first viewing, he said he just sat there until after the credit roll, didn't wanna go back to the boring real world, hehe.


----------



## sakeido

at this rate, I'm going to go see it by myself again sometime this weekend


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> Avatar is now the 2nd highest grossing movie of all time, having just blown past Return of the King in the middle of the week. How close will it get to Titanic? hmmm



(worldwide, and not adjusted for inflation, again, just for the record...as... well... it's discussion about a record)


----------



## sakeido

adjusted for inflation Gone with the Wind made $1.4 billion domestically. who cares.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I hope it beats Titanic. At least then a good film will be in pole position.


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> adjusted for inflation Gone with the Wind made $1.4 billion domestically. who cares.



I'm not the one that brought it up again. Apparently people do care. It's just information.


----------



## Arminius

Got the book today!! So cool!

School got canceled tomorrow, so it looks like seeing avatar again might be go. After nearly two weeks I'm starting to have withdrawal symptoms.


----------



## ZeroSignal

I really need to see this fucking film again.


----------



## synrgy

So I haven't seen it yet, but I just read the synopsis for Battle For Terra (animated flick), and I couldn't help but laugh.

I love Avatar, but man.. the story really has been done a ton of times in film already.

James Cameron's Avahontis With Wolves For Terra 

Again, I love it, so don't hate. You all know it's true. If you can think of more, work them into the title! Could be epic! Like that restaurant T.G.I. Tuesday's Red Apple Gardennigans!


----------



## Stormingdust

What a movie. I didn't expect that I'll see the movie 3 times and still be interested to see it for a 4th time, it just doesn't get boring. There was not one scene that I did not like. 2 hours and a half of pure movie pleasure and thunderownage.

I know it is kind of late to say this but, if you didn't see the movie then you should, NOW. If you did see the movie then see it again


----------



## ZeroSignal

synrgy said:


> So I haven't seen it yet, but I just read the synopsis for Battle For Terra (animated flick), and I couldn't help but laugh.
> 
> I love Avatar, but man.. the story really has been done a ton of times in film already.
> 
> James Cameron's Avahontis With Wolves For Terra
> 
> Again, I love it, so don't hate. You all know it's true. If you can think of more, work them into the title! Could be epic! Like that restaurant T.G.I. Tuesday's Red Apple Gardennigans!





Dude. You do realise that the story for Avatar was written 15 year ago? I'm so tired of people who haven't seen this film contracting verbal diarrhoea...



Stormingdust said:


> What a movie. I didn't expect that I'll see the movie 3 times and still be interested to see it for a 4th time, it just doesn't get boring. There was not one scene that I did not like. 2 hours and a half of pure movie pleasure and thunderownage.
> 
> I know it is kind of late to say this but, if you didn't see the movie then you should, NOW. If you did see the movie then see it again



Man, I really want to see it again. The only thing is if I go into town to see it I won't be able to get a bus home and will be stranded for _hours_ due to weather.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

ZeroSignal said:


> Dude. You do realise that the story for Avatar was written 15 year ago? I'm so tired of people who haven't seen this film contracting verbal diarrhoea...



Dances With Wolves was 1990. In fairness, Avatar's storyline is no different from the typical Western outcast-gets-accepted blueprint. Many films have been made on the premise, Dances With Wolves, A Man Called Horse and Pocahontas to name a few.

I haven't seen the first two films, but I do know Avatar's story is borrowed from them having read the plot sketches, A Man Called Horse and Dances With Wolves have basically _exactly_ the same plot as Avatar.



Stormingdust said:


> If you did see the movie then see it again



You're preaching to the choir here dude


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> Dances With Wolves was 1990. In fairness, Avatar's storyline is no different from the typical Western outcast-gets-accepted blueprint. Many films have been made on the premise, Dances With Wolves, A Man Called Horse and Pocahontas to name a few.
> 
> I haven't seen the first two films, but I do know Avatar's story is borrowed from them having read the plot sketches, A Man Called Horse and Dances With Wolves have basically _exactly_ the same plot as Avatar.
> 
> 
> 
> You're preaching to the choir here dude



I was referring directly to the Battle For Terra comment.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Shoulda said so


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> Shoulda said so



fu, n00b. I'm cranky. 






EDIT: I just noticed that your post count is absurdly high.


----------



## synrgy

Did you completely ignore the part where I re-stated how much I *love* the movie?

You didn't make it. Don't be so defensive.

Here's the description to which I was referring:



> Senn (Justin Long) and Mala (Evan Rachel Wood) are two rebellious alien teens living on the beautiful planet Terra, a place that promotes peace and tolerance, having long ago rejected war and weapons of mass destruction. But when Terra is invaded by human beings fleeing a civil war and environmental catastrophe, the planet is plunged into chaos. During the upheaval, Mala befriends an injured human pilot (Luke Wilson) and each learns the two races are not so different from one another. Together they must face the terrifying realization that in a world of limited resources, only one of their races is likely to survive.



It's funny. You know it is. Just admit it. 

Again, if I haven't already made it abundantly clear, I fucking LOVE the movie, and I'm getting ready to go see it again.


----------



## K-Roll

funny how you never see these extraterrestrials doing usual stuff, like eating, peeing and laying a brick somewhere behind a fluorescent flower


----------



## phaeded0ut

K-Roll said:


> funny how you never see these extraterrestrials doing usual stuff, like eating, peeing and laying a brick somewhere behind a fluorescent flower



Babylon 5 is one of the few Sci Fi TV shows where you see this.


----------



## Arminius

Maybe I'm going crazy, but I also see some very Dune-like elements to the story as well. Probably part of why I like this movie so much.



synrgy said:


> James Cameron's Avahontis With Wolves For Terra of Dune


----------



## sakeido

Avatar (not Project 880)'s script
http://www.foxscreenings.com/media/pdf/JamesCameronAVATAR.pdf

I'm only about 35 pages in and man... tons of good stuff got cut. Really, really good stuff.


----------



## synrgy

Aysakh said:


> Maybe I'm going crazy, but I also see some very Dune-like elements to the story as well. Probably part of why I like this movie so much.



I can do one better -- it came up this morning on Facebook.

James Cameron's Avahontis With Wolves For Terra of Dune _Gully_.


----------



## Arminius

sakeido said:


> Avatar (not Project 880)'s script
> http://www.foxscreenings.com/media/pdf/JamesCameronAVATAR.pdf
> 
> I'm only about 35 pages in and man... tons of good stuff got cut. Really, really good stuff.



You are my hero 




synrgy said:


> I can do one better -- it came up this morning on Facebook.
> 
> James Cameron's Avahontis With Wolves For Terra of Dune _Gully_.



I remember fern gully, that was a looooooong time ago


----------



## ZeroSignal

synrgy said:


> Did you completely ignore the part where I re-stated how much I *love* the movie?
> 
> You didn't make it. Don't be so defensive.
> 
> Here's the description to which I was referring:
> 
> 
> 
> It's funny. You know it is. Just admit it.
> 
> Again, if I haven't already made it abundantly clear, I fucking LOVE the movie, and I'm getting ready to go see it again.



Your first line said you hadn't seen the movie so I assumed that you were talking about Avatar. My bad. It seems like very other person who hasn't seen the film just feels the need to spew comparisons with other films _constantly_ so it gets really irritating to read so the red mist descended...


----------



## sakeido

Just finished reading the script. Man oh man.. if most of that stuff makes it into the extended edition, it is going to be GODLIKE. I want them to release it theaters too  So much good shit got cut!


----------



## sakeido

here's a summary of all the extra stuff in the script


Spoiler



A scene on Earth that we already know was filmed & cut because it was in the trailer. Jake goes to a bar, sees some guy hit a woman, he takes the guy down, jumps out of his wheelchair and beats the shit out of him. Also a scene in Jake's apartment, another shot of the outdoors showing how crappy Earth is.

A scene early on showing how hostile the environment is as they clearcut a section of the forest.

A bit early on with Grace asking what Quaritch wanted with Jake and reminding Jake she's the boss. Some hinting that Quaritch is the cause of her falling out with the Na'vi. She talks about how Norm is their best chance at getting back in, since he has trained the hardest and can speak the language, so this sets up Norm's later jealousy

They go to Grace's old school before their first trip into the woods to pick up supplies. You see bullet holes in the wall, the schools is rundown, she keeps books there hoping the Na'vi kids will come back and read them.

A conversation during Jake's first supper with the Na'vi where they talk about him and how he will most likely die. They point out how odd-looking he is.

Brief scene of village life before Jake first learns how to ride a direhorse

Norm and Trudy have an intimate relationship

There is a short VO to explain why the mountains float

Norm has a blow-up at Jake before he comes around again

Grace lectures Jake on how he's letting his human body waste away. Then Jake asks her about what happened at the school - turns out Neytiri had a sister who was killed by the marines for burning some bulldozers years before, when she was really young. She ran to the school because she thought Grace could help her, except the marines machine gunned her and a few other children.

Tsu'Tey would have gotten tons more screen time elaborating on his relationship with Jake and Neytiri. He hates Jake, obviously, and hates him more when Jake continues succeeding in his learning to be a na'vi

Instead of Neytiri explaining what the toruk is, Jake talks about it with Trudy and she mentions how it destroys their choppers

After seeing the Tree of Souls, Jake gets Grace to pull up a picture and then is forced to turn it over to Quaritch and Selfridge to keep the Avatar program running. Trudy delivers it.

There is a hunt of some huge beasts that feed the tribe. Jake gets a huge one and Tsu'Tey grudgingly gives him some respect. They have a big dance and get smashed - Tsu'tey and Jake share a moment before Neytiri takes Jake away for a dance, so Tsu'tey gets angry again. Eytukan and Mo'at notice that Neytiri is taken with Jake and they say they should stop it, but they do nothing

A scene with Selfridge golfing outside. Complains about how he keeps hooking his shot because of his exo-pack. Grace brings up Jake's miraculous progress and how they will not leave hometree.

Jake has to take some crazy psychoactive worm and scorpion venom to go on a vision quest just before he becomes part of the tribe. Grace is talking about how it is a dumb idea and how it will probably kill his Avatar's different brain. Jake says he has to become one of them, and she rails furiously at him about how he never could be. They all know he has fallen for Neytiri, and point out that they can't be together.

In his vision quest, Jake freaks out. Sees the ruined forest (just after Hometree is cut down) and the shadow of the toruk. He can't explain it.

When he hooks up with Neytiri, she comments that "kissing is good but we have something better." They connect their braids and then pork softly for a few hours. Jake brings up his human body and that he isn't really a Na'vi, but she says that his avatar body and spirit are real enough. She comments on how she hated humans but he showed her spirit is all that matters. Then she points out they are mated for life and Jake is surprised at this, but says "It's cool. I'm there."

Tsu'tey has a big freakout after he realizes Neytiri mated with Jake and he talks about his hate for humans. Him and Jake have a ritual challenge instead of an improv knife fight and Tsu'tey wins when he clubs Jake upside the head (which happens just as Quaritch shuts down his link).

Quaritch drops an f-bomb and says "local pussy" instead of "tail." This and a lot of blood mentions make me think they were shooting for the limit of the PG-13 rating

When Grace gives her speech about how Pandora is all connected, she mentions that she has just recently postulated this theory and hasn't been able to investigate it enough.

After they bulldoze the glade, Tsu'tey's war party retaliates by burning a large amount of equipment and killing six soldiers. Quaritch says this was the incident they were looking for to warrant a mobilization; Selfridge agrees to Quaritch's plan to take Hometree, after waffling for a moment (Quaritch tells him to quit being a bitch); Grace suspects they bulldozed the glade on purpose to provoke the na'vi.

When Jake takes Grace to the Tree of Souls to get a soul transplant, she says she always held back so she never really fit with the people. Jake didn't, and she is proud of him.

The script still has the shock and awe, terror with terror, and pre-emptive attack lines

After Quaritch gives his speech about his plan, he arms and mobilizes everyone including the miners. Selfridge tells him that things have gotten completely out of control and Quaritch can't do this. Quaritch slaps him up and tells him that since Quaritch declared "Condition Red," he runs the entire show.

A brief scene where Jake shows the Na'vi how to take down the human war machines.

Quaritch brings both shuttles with him on the attack. One drops bombs on the na'vi on the ground, and then is taken down. The other shuttle says "fuck this I'm out" and leaves, commenting that his shuttle is the only way off planet. As a result, most of the remaining gunships go with the shuttle to make sure it makes it back intact. Quaritch pushes on, planning to use the Dragon to take out the Tree of Souls

Tsu'tey isn't killed before he hits the ground. He lands, and Wainright (the guy who was on Trudy's ship when she decided not to shoot at Hometree) scalps him by cutting off his braid, commenting that "I heard this is worse than death for you"

Jake fails to stop the Dragon and Trudy crashes her ship into it in a suicide run, as Norm (after his Avatar is killed) watches from the jungle floor. Trudy in a matter-of-fact way says "Norm, I love you"

Max leads the Avatar scientists in an insurrection at the base. The capture the link center, then use some mining equipment to destroy the command center and the Avatars take it over. Selfridge, already stunned as he is informed the Dragon has been destroyed, can't believe what has happened as Max and the scientists take over.

At the end, Jake doesn't pass out before getting his mask on. Neytiri goes bounding in, puts it on him, and then they wordlessly sit there holding each other - no "I See you" stuff

Jake has a conversation with Tsu'tey. Tsu'tey remarks that he has been cut off from everything and that he can't live (it is the na'vi way). He makes Jake the leader of the clan, says that he was proud to call Jake his brother and that Toruk makto "was his last shadow" and Jake ends Tsu'tey's suffering.

A brief scene of the Venture Star leaving Pandora

Jake in the link center. The scientists are staying behind to keep the links up and running. Instead of saying its his birthday, he says its a funeral for someone he knows.


----------



## sakeido

double post


----------



## Arminius

If they had left all of that in there the movie would be a good deal over three and a half hours long, which means they definitely should have left it in


----------



## synrgy

sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Instead of Neytiri explaining what the toruk is, Jake talks about it with Trudy and she mentions how it destroys their choppers



I much prefer what happened on screen to that, actually.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> There is a hunt of some huge beasts that feed the tribe. Jake gets a huge one and Tsu'Tey grudgingly gives him some respect. They have a big dance and get smashed - Tsu'tey and Jake share a moment before Neytiri takes Jake away for a dance, so Tsu'tey gets angry again. Eytukan and Mo'at notice that Neytiri is taken with Jake and they say they should stop it, but they do nothing



I can see how that would make the director's cut, but I also fully understand why it was cut from the theatrical. It just wasn't at all necessary to move the plot along.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Jake has to take some crazy psychoactive worm and scorpion venom to go on a vision quest just before he becomes part of the tribe. Grace is talking about how it is a dumb idea and how it will probably kill his Avatar's different brain. Jake says he has to become one of them, and she rails furiously at him about how he never could be. They all know he has fallen for Neytiri, and point out that they can't be together.



Same goes for that. It's taking too time to focus on the 'love story', which isn't really at all what the movie is about. I'm glad it was cut from the theatrical.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> When he hooks up with Neytiri, she comments that "kissing is good but we have something better." They connect their braids and then pork softly for a few hours. Jake brings up his human body and that he isn't really a Na'vi, but she says that his avatar body and spirit are real enough. She comments on how she hated humans but he showed her spirit is all that matters. Then she points out they are mated for life and Jake is surprised at this, but says "It's cool. I'm there."



With the exception of the specific dialog, I don't see how that's different from the theatrical.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> When Grace gives her speech about how Pandora is all connected, she mentions that she has just recently postulated this theory and hasn't been able to investigate it enough.



I could have *sworn* that was also in the theatrical...



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> When Jake takes Grace to the Tree of Souls to get a soul transplant, she says she always held back so she never really fit with the people. Jake didn't, and she is proud of him.



That doesn't fit Grace's character at all. I'm glad it was cut.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> After Quaritch gives his speech about his plan, he arms and mobilizes everyone including the miners. Selfridge tells him that things have gotten completely out of control and Quaritch can't do this. Quaritch slaps him up and tells him that since Quaritch declared "Condition Red," he runs the entire show.



That might have been useful to see. I really like the actor that played Selfridge, and would have liked to have understood that character better. That being said, I feel like what we *did* see was hardly any different.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Tsu'tey isn't killed before he hits the ground. He lands, and Wainright (the guy who was on Trudy's ship when she decided not to shoot at Hometree) scalps him by cutting off his braid, commenting that "I heard this is worse than death for you"



Definitely too harsh for the theatrical cut as we all saw it.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Max leads the Avatar scientists in an insurrection at the base. The capture the link center, then use some mining equipment to destroy the command center and the Avatars take it over. Selfridge, already stunned as he is informed the Dragon has been destroyed, can't believe what has happened as Max and the scientists take over.



Okay, so it's been a couple of weeks and I only saw it once, but I could have *sworn* that this (or something just like it) also happened in the theatrical.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> At the end, Jake doesn't pass out before getting his mask on. Neytiri goes bounding in, puts it on him, and then they wordlessly sit there holding each other - no "I See you" stuff



I preferred what we saw in the theatrical to that description, for sure.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Jake has a conversation with Tsu'tey. Tsu'tey remarks that he has been cut off from everything and that he can't live (it is the na'vi way). He makes Jake the leader of the clan, says that he was proud to call Jake his brother and that Toruk makto "was his last shadow" and Jake ends Tsu'tey's suffering.



Dear God, I'm REALLY glad that got cut. What an awful scene that would have been.. Would have really damaged the overall plot/feeling us viewers walked away with.



sakeido said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Jake in the link center. The scientists are staying behind to keep the links up and running. Instead of saying its his birthday, he says its a funeral for someone he knows.



Birthday > Funeral.

Wow. Having got all the way through that, I'm hoping there *isn't* a director's cut, cause adding all of that would have really messed with my overall perception of the film.


----------



## sakeido

I think the majority of it would have made it a better film. More characterization, closes up a few plot holes, fleshes out the world slightly but the key thing is the characterization.. especially for Tsu'tey and Grace. Everything to do with the school should have been in there, Neytiri's sister probably should have been mentioned, I like how Jake brings up the difference between him and Neytiri, and Selfridge in particular should have gotten more screen time. The beginning part on Earth would have been a nice bonus. 

The researchers did take the side of the na'vi at the end, but they didn't show anything to suggest they turned on the RDA in the midst of the end battle.

There are some things that are better the way they were shot in the movie - the whole end fight and Tsu'tey's death, and obviously the scripted versions will never be seen. But the rest.. I would have loved for it to all have been in there. 

The movie we saw is fantastic but the script James Cameron wrote is fucking awesome. I only wish that is what we got to see on the big screen... stupid IMAX time limit


----------



## Stormingdust

Wow. And I thought the story was already epic...


----------



## silentrage

Script > Movie.

I always did have a feeling some stuff were cut.


----------



## BigBaldIan

We can only hope for a 3+ hour Director's Cut release.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Hmm... Sorry, sakeido, but I'll have to side with synergy with the stuff he mentioned. All that spirit quest stuff seems like hippy crap to me and would have made me like the film a lot less.  And that scene about dancing with Neytiri would have detracted heavily. I still have to read the entire script but I don't think I'd prefer the original scripted version over the theatrical release.

Once I've finished reading the script I'll post my final thoughts on it.

EDIT: Except for the scientist's rebellion. That would have been pretty cool to see.


----------



## Sepultorture

Saw Avatar in IMAX 3D last night, FUCKING...YES
what an awesome movie and amazing FX


----------



## synrgy

Finally saw it a 2nd time last night. So amazing. 



Spoiler



Upon 2nd viewing, I've decided that maybe I would have preferred to see a *little* bit more development between Jake and Naytiri after all. On screen, their connection kind of comes out of nowhere. One on screen minute she hates him, and the next she's totally gaga for him...


----------



## ZeroSignal

synrgy said:


> Finally saw it a 2nd time last night. So amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Upon 2nd viewing, I've decided that maybe I would have preferred to see a *little* bit more development between Jake and Naytiri after all. On screen, their connection kind of comes out of nowhere. One on screen minute she hates him, and the next she's totally gaga for him...





Spoiler



What about when he first meets her? He follows her like a puppy.  Or what about when they're doing the archery practice and she gets close to him and they look into each other's eyes blah blah blah. Then when Jake got his Banshee they share a flight together and they're flirting. I didn't find it surprising at all.


----------



## synrgy

ZeroSignal said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Or what about when they're doing the archery practice and she gets close to him and they look into each other's eyes blah blah blah.





Spoiler



That's exactly the part I mean. Prior to that moment, she seems to not want ANYTHING to do with him, and is only training him because she was ordered to. Then all of a sudden it's "oops, my face got too close to yours, and now I think I wanna marry you."?


----------



## phaeded0ut

Have to admit that I'd like to see a director's cut version of this movie. Cody, many thanks for the synopsis! On the same token, I'm hoping that with the Blue-Ray release the promised cut footage is presented in such a way as to view the movie "uncut" as it were or theatrical release without said footage. Sadly, I'd have been a bit happier if this were rated, "R" vs. "PG-13," but that's just me. Just glad that Quaritch didn't say, "flippity-floppity-floop." I think that they could've made the mercenaries and landscape more visceral.


----------



## ZeroSignal

sakeido said:


> Avatar (not Project 880)'s script
> http://www.foxscreenings.com/media/pdf/JamesCameronAVATAR.pdf
> 
> I'm only about 35 pages in and man... tons of good stuff got cut. Really, really good stuff.



After reading the entire script I am SO glad that what got cut did get cut. The script was so corny and lacking in flow and feeling it's just crazy. The film is so much more concise, fluid and full of feeling. I'm especially happy that they left out the whole Norm-Trudy thing as I don't think that fits _at all_. And that they took out the canoe scene as to me that removes the literalness of the connection with the planet. And the "spirit-hunt" thing is incredibly cheesy and is just ridiculous to me.

I think any changes they make to the film for the DVD/Blu-Ray release should be very subtle. One of the best elements of the film is the pacing so they have to be very careful not to disrupt it unnecessarily.



phaeded0ut said:


> Have to admit that I'd like to see a director's cut version of this movie. Cody, many thanks for the synopsis! On the same token, I'm hoping that with the Blue-Ray release the promised cut footage is presented in such a way as to view the movie "uncut" as it were or theatrical release without said footage. Sadly, I'd have been a bit happier if this were rated, "R" vs. "PG-13," but that's just me. Just glad that Quaritch didn't say, "flippity-floppity-floop." I think that they could've made the mercenaries and landscape more visceral.



I just don't think I'd enjoy Avatar any more if it was more visceral than it was. It functions very well as PG-13 and I'm happy with it at 21. 

Agreed on Quaritch, though. I mean, "shut your pie-hole"? Wow... Even a "shut the hell up" would be better.


----------



## phaeded0ut

Have to agree that the pacing of the theatrical release was extremely impressive. Again, I'd like to have the theatrical release as one mode of view on the Blue-Ray release, and an option to have the actual cut footage included in their relative contextual places as an "uncut" version of the movie. 

Would have really enjoyed seeing Grace's school in both a memory or as a watched video, and as a "present" scene or two within the movie. Dialogue was in dire need of a re-write and in my opinion was the weakest part of the movie. Sigourney Weaver's performance actually reminded me of several of my colleagues from work, ... granted the same is equally true of Giovanni Ribisi (who should have had a few more lines in the least). 

This said, there's always this article to bring home that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder:" 
'Avatar' No. 1 for fourth straight week - CNN.com

The below article elicits a response of, "really, ... I think you're taking things too far, folks..."
Audiences experience 'Avatar' blues - CNN.com


----------



## pink freud

synrgy said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> That's exactly the part I mean. Prior to that moment, she seems to not want ANYTHING to do with him, and is only training him because she was ordered to. Then all of a sudden it's "oops, my face got too close to yours, and now I think I wanna marry you."?




*Contemplates taking up archery*


----------



## phaeded0ut

pink freud said:


> *Contemplates taking up archery*



Head's up, it can be a very expensive hobby depending on which version of archery you are contemplating. Kyudo is incredible (and super expensive), I highly recommend it, but only if you're right-handed or can switch to doing everything right-handed within this martial art. Not a bad way to meet women, either. 

For your first bow avoid compounds and all the gimicky gadgets that tend to go with them, and go with a smaller recurve in order to get muscles/motions trained up. If you start with a longbow of some form you'll find that there are quite a number of bad habits to unlearn.


----------



## ZeroSignal

phaeded0ut said:


> Would have really enjoyed seeing Grace's school in both a memory or as a watched video, and as a "present" scene or two within the movie. Dialogue was in dire need of a re-write and in my opinion was the weakest part of the movie. Sigourney Weaver's performance actually reminded me of several of my colleagues from work, ... granted the same is equally true of Giovanni Ribisi (who should have had a few more lines in the least).



Yeah. That would have been nice to see, actually.

I thought the only truly poor dialogue was by Weaver. Otherwise I quite liked it. I quite liked Ribisi's acting, too.


----------



## sakeido

The movie works very well as is. They obviously cut it to a point that its perfect and you couldn't take anything more out. But I still think it could have used some character moments.. maybe Weaver's stuff was originally in and got cut because she was phoning it in for the whole movie? 
I really would have liked for more background on what happened between the humans and na'vi with the school.. obviously things ended poorly but I would have liked to have seen it myself. The Norm & Trudy thing, yeah that could stay on the cutting room floor. But most of the scenes with Tsu'tey I would add back in. Mostly, I just want more character moments for everyone.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Oh well, hopefully they'll release a director's cut. That way, we can see what we want, and people don't have to watch it if they don't like 

Personally, I'd be very interested in seeing the background shit.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

This has probably been posted before, but it is very amusing... and very true.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez




----------



## ZeroSignal

I was just telling my mate about that image today on the way home from seeing it again. Funny stuff...


----------



## synrgy

phaeded0ut said:


> The below article elicits a response of, "really, ... I think you're taking things too far, folks..."
> Audiences experience 'Avatar' blues - CNN.com



John Graham-Cumming: CNN.com jumps the shark by writing a story about a forum containing 129 people


----------



## cataclysm_child




----------



## synrgy

cataclysm_child said:


> IMG



That was already posted, but it is funny.

Here's a pretty neat article about the sound design:

Designing Sound The Sound Design of &#8220;Avatar&#8221;


----------



## cataclysm_child

Hrmf. Didn´t bother to go through 13 pages just to see if it had been posted already 

Great movie, but not as great as everyone say it is IMO.


----------



## Marv Attaxx

Just came back from the cinema and it's still awesome


----------



## Troegenator

I thought the movie sucked. Way overhyped and bored me to death. If it wasnt for the cool looking digital effects, i would of left the theatre.


----------



## Arminius

I just decided that this movie could easily be the best thing that has happened to me in recent memory because...

a. I know a hot chick who loves Avatar
b. She wants to see it Saturday
c. She needs a ride
d. I have a ride


----------



## sakeido

Just saw it again with my dad. Six times now  I think this might have been the last one though.. this is costing me way too much money. I still WANT to see it again though

Its a complete 180 from Watchmen, where an hour into it the second time I was thinking "alright fuck this"


----------



## wannabguitarist

Aysakh said:


> I just decided that this movie could easily be the best thing that has happened to me in recent memory because...
> 
> a. I know a hot chick who loves Avatar
> b. She wants to see it Saturday
> c. She needs a ride
> d. I have a ride



Just make sure she isn't meeting someone there


----------



## Arminius

wannabguitarist said:


> Just make sure she isn't meeting someone there



That would be awkward 

I would still watch the movie though


----------



## BigBaldIan

Troegenator said:


> I thought the movie sucked. Way overhyped and bored me to death. If it wasnt for the cool looking digital effects, i would of left the theatre.


 
Always interested in an opposing point of view, any particular reason why it wasn't your thing?


----------



## sakeido

no answer. Apparently he's just a hater  

I figure I will limit myself to seeing this movie in theaters once a month until it is out of theaters. In other news, Avatar screeners are going out to Academy members right now so hopefully a decent version will pop up for free soon..


----------



## Arminius

attn: na'vi side boob lovers
AVATAR: Passionate Extended scene may land on DVD | PiggyNannan


----------



## Randy

Aysakh said:


> That would be awkward
> 
> I would still watch the movie though



There's a scene in New Moon just like this.  and then double   to the fact that I know that.


----------



## Arminius

Randy said:


> There's a scene in New Moon just like this.  and then double   to the fact that I know that.


 
I'm glad to say I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. 

(and hopefully will never know)


----------



## hotrodded_wooden_ mill

ZeroSignal said:


> Actually... yes it is. It's been in the making (i.e. design phase) for 15 years.
> 
> And as for the amount of detail it took to make the film, it took 50 man hours for every 24th of a second to complete. (Sigourney Weaver, Sky News interview)
> 
> Don't compare Avatar to the entire LoTR trilogy as that wouldn't be fair. Compare it to The Fellowship of The Ring.



Please, don't be silly mate.

LOTR has a made up world, language, architecture, belief, races as influentual as it can be. A entire genre erupted from it ( Fantasy)

Peter Jackson hired people who dedicated their entire lifes to LOTR, so effectively he gained on average 30+ years of experience for every little thing they made for the movie.

Per example: John Howe/ Alan Lee painted and visualized the world of Tolkien for years and years. Peter Jackson got that for "free" when he hired them.

That being said: I absolutely love the movie Avatar. One of the top movies this year imo.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I do love a bit of Zoe Saldana sideboob.


----------



## TheClownPrince

At the risk of repeating word for word what someone else has just said however many posts ago. I found this to be spectacular but boring... if that is at all possible. It's visually ravishing but the Na'Vi are terribly uninspired characters from a design standpoint, the acting across the board is completely lacking in that any real snap, wit or charm and the dialogue is poo. Even the story (a must for any great film) is cliche ridden and has been done before, numerous times... and better than this. 

The whole 3D thing too, this finally proves that it's still just a gimmick. I found the film just as immersive in 2D, infact, possibly more so. Seems like a giant waste of money to me (to make and to pay to see).

There's one reason why they're pushing 3D down our throats.... nobody has been able to pirate it yet... so we gotta pay to see it. Which is BS...

Lovely looking movie with nothing fresh really going on behind all the gloss. Shame.


----------



## ZeroSignal

hotrodded_wooden_ mill said:


> Please, don't be silly mate.
> 
> LOTR has a made up world, language, architecture, belief, races as influentual as it can be. A entire genre erupted from it ( Fantasy)
> 
> Peter Jackson hired people who dedicated their entire lifes to LOTR, so effectively he gained on average 30+ years of experience for every little thing they made for the movie.
> 
> Per example: John Howe/ Alan Lee painted and visualized the world of Tolkien for years and years. Peter Jackson got that for "free" when he hired them.
> 
> That being said: I absolutely love the movie Avatar. One of the top movies this year imo.



I'm talking about the film, not the books.

You're comparing something that has existed for 73 years to something that has existed as a medium for a month, today. You could say that Avatar has existed for one 876th of the time that the ENTIRE LoTR catalogue has, so I still think you're being very unfair to something that isn't even a franchise yet.


----------



## Arminius

Actually ended up seeing Youth in Revolt ( a really good film btw) because avatar was sold out a month after its release.  Oh, and in other news


----------



## BigBaldIan

Now hit $1.6bn worldwide. All of a sudden Titanic's record looks a little shaky.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I hope it smashes Titanic's total sales, this is 5x the film Titanic was.


----------



## sakeido

I dunno if Avatar will be able to beat Titanic's domestic record, but at this point it looks like the Dark Knight is going to be the new #3. Avatar has been #1 at the BO for five straight weeks now and there is no new competition this next weekend.. could it be six?


----------



## BigBaldIan

At this point we may be looking at when it breaks it magical $1.8bn mark not if. Another good week or so may see that happen.


----------



## GazPots

Is the highest grossing movies list purely made up of the cinema tickets sold?



I was thinking this as when the DVD of Avatar comes out it might just take an even more ridiculous amount of money.


----------



## Xaios

TheClownPrince said:


> There's one reason why they're pushing 3D down our throats.... nobody has been able to pirate it yet... so we gotta pay to see it. Which is BS...



While I agree with your evaluation that the dialogue and and characters were a bit flat, are you actually suggesting it's bullshit that you have to pay a comparatively measly amount of money for a movie that cost literally hundreds of millions of dollars to make, not to mention several years of hard work from hundreds of people? All for your enjoyment?


Shameful.


----------



## Rick

phaeded0ut said:


> The below article elicits a response of, "really, ... I think you're taking things too far, folks..."
> Audiences experience 'Avatar' blues - CNN.com



Go ahead and off yourselves if you really believe this shit. 

Darwin wins this one.


----------



## silentrage

That's a little extreme, but yeah I could see how some people might not want to come back.


----------



## BigBaldIan

The CNN article has been shown to be somewhat exaggerated.

John Graham-Cumming: CNN.com jumps the shark by writing a story about a forum containing 129 people


----------



## Ben.Last

Xaios said:


> While I agree with your evaluation that the dialogue and and characters were a bit flat, are you actually suggesting it's bullshit that you have to pay a comparatively measly amount of money for a movie that cost literally hundreds of millions of dollars to make, not to mention several years of hard work from hundreds of people? All for your enjoyment?
> 
> 
> Shameful.



I assume that his problem is actually with the very apparent fact that studios are pushing 3D for the sole reason of trying to stay ahead of piracy not because the tech is actually worth a damn. This is the same type of tactic that the music industry would have used a decade ago and look where it got them.


----------



## phantom911

Now, I've already seen it twice in Real3D. Is the experience any better watching it in IMAX 3D?


----------



## BigBaldIan

Well the above would suggest that the technology is worth a damn and people are paying good coin to see it!


----------



## Ben.Last

BigBaldIan said:


> Well the above would suggest that the technology is worth a damn and people are paying good coin to see it!



People did the same for a while with the original "blue/red" 3D back when that first came around but that ended up being a fad too. Of course this situation is a bit different(and more insidious in my book) considering the fact that 3D was originally about just getting asses in the seats by using a newfangled technology as opposed to getting asses to stop stealing movies.

And since when is a lot of people buying/seeing/taking part in something a sign whatsoever that said thing is actually, in the grand scheme of things, worth a damn(I don't mean monetarily).


----------



## phantom911

I happened to like how the 3D was pulled off, i didnt know that was a crime


----------



## sakeido

phantom911 said:


> Now, I've already seen it twice in Real3D. Is the experience any better watching it in IMAX 3D?



I personally prefer one of our local theaters Real3D over the IMAX 3D. Way crisper, sharper image, the glasses are way more comfortable, and its easier to get in  Its just the one theater though. maybe their projectionist is better or something? The other three theaters I saw it at in Real3D were all worse than Imax


----------



## BigBaldIan

Lern2swim said:


> People did the same for a while with the original "blue/red" 3D back when that first came around but that ended up being a fad too. Of course this situation is a bit different(and more insidious in my book) considering the fact that 3D was originally about just getting asses in the seats by using a newfangled technology as opposed to getting asses to stop stealing movies.
> 
> And since when is a lot of people buying/seeing/taking part in something a sign whatsoever that said thing is actually, in the grand scheme of things, worth a damn(I don't mean monetarily).


 
Depends on what your definition is, but that's the whole point. By not delineating what it means any counter argument can be immediately dismissed as "it's still not worth a damn by my non-existent definition of the term".

Ok try these for size then:

- A fundamental shift in the way we view movies. I'm not talking about red/blue 3d but proper full depth of perspective. In short, not only for what it is, but what will follow as a result of its technical breakthroughs.
- The creation of a cultural phenomenon in the sci-fi community and in the wider movie going public.
- The most succesful film of the decade in the shortest amount of time. There is the Twilight argument however but who are we to judge whether something is worth the price of admission?

And this is a way to get bums on seats. With home cinemas offering great quality at an affordable price point why see something in the cinema when you can just buy it later on Blu-Ray? Cinema has had to up its game and it just has, the "it's all just an anti-piracy scam" sounds just a tad paranoid in my humble opinion.

But since you've refused to define your terms, we can't really debate this any further can we?


----------



## ZeroSignal

Lern2swim said:


> I assume that his problem is actually with the very apparent fact that studios are pushing 3D for the sole reason of trying to stay ahead of piracy not because the tech is actually worth a damn. This is the same type of tactic that the music industry would have used a decade ago and look where it got them.



I hate to break it to you, chief, but this film is also out quite extensively in 2D.


----------



## BigBaldIan

In fact as far as anti-piracy measures go it's fantastic, it actually adds something to the medium instead of crippling it. There's software development companies the world over that would give their collective right nut to be able to have that instead of DRM. 

This is all getting far too serious we need a side-boob derailment.


----------



## silentrage

I'm so confused. 

How does 3D prevent piracy in any way? There is a perfectly normal 2D version people can, and have already stolen... where I live anyway.

If you're saying it prevents piracy by making people WANT to PAY to SEE IT, then I think you're quite delusional. 

And I also don't think James Cameron, the visionary director of our fuckin time, came up with a brand new technology, for the purpose of reducing piracy, which doesn't even work in that regard.


----------



## BigBaldIan

All hyperbole aside, my mate Paddy sent me this email which I'd thought I'd share as it sums up pretty much the whole shebang in a fair manner.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The film itself was always more a testbed than a standalone story in itself - Yes Cameron worked his posterior off for the last decade but that was more in regard to the medium rather than the actual story itself, which as he has always maintained was used to tell a simple tale, albiet one where people have sat down and made as practical as possible (even with the Halleujah Mountains). Cameron's intention was to show 'this is possible' and push film into another development phase (e.g. silent to talkie, B&W to Colour, Celluoid to Digital, etc) and develop the art whilst giving cinemas another string to their bow in an age where it is more a chore to drag yourself to the local Odeon than flick a button or two on your sky box or DVD player.

What has happened is that people have responded to it well - when was the last time you were in the cinema and actually saw a line of people waiting to be let into a screen and the screens were packed out? Avatar the film, as a stand alone, certainly wouldn't be my vote for the greatest film in itself (story, acting, etc) but as a technical achievement it's on a par with the greatest and more than proven its point.


----------



## silentrage

And apparently the point is "Don't pirate this film!"


----------



## BigBaldIan

silentrage said:


> And apparently the point is "Don't pirate this film!"


 






Sorry couldn't resist it!


----------



## silentrage

Me? Sarcastic? Nau~~~~~

/vanwilder


----------



## TheClownPrince

Xaios said:


> While I agree with your evaluation that the dialogue and and characters were a bit flat, are you actually suggesting it's bullshit that you have to pay a comparatively measly amount of money for a movie that cost literally hundreds of millions of dollars to make, not to mention several years of hard work from hundreds of people? All for your enjoyment?
> 
> 
> Shameful.



Ahh a good old fashioned misunderstanding, how I miss those...

To be blunt in my answer to you... "no".

To elaborate just a little, what annoys me is that they're pushing 3D on people who don't really want it. Yes, I'm aware some people seem to like it, as with most gimmicks... but honestly, take it away and I can't see all too many people crying all that many rivers. Simply because it's not pirateable (yet), it's forced on us. It isn't just Movies either, it's making it's way into gaming, another form of media I have a strong passionate love for. 

3D is and has always been a gimmick, I have no qualms whatsoever paying to go see a movie, but show me it in regular 2D for goodness sake, I don't want all this pointy pointy, bullets whiz past my face, creatures giant blue cock in my eye nonsense. I'm OK with a film here or there being 3D, especially kid's stuff as it keeps them entertained... but films are not better because of it. When I watch The Godfather or Blade Runner or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc, I don't think to myself "man... this would be so much better if it had 30% less colour saturation and everything was pointing out at me from the screen". Give me my proper films back, I don't give a fuck about your 3D shite Mr Cameron . I'm not saying pirating is good, I'm saying forcing 3D on people who don't want it just cause it can't be stolen by naughty people... is BAD!.

A great film should already be hugely immersive... 3D is a joke, a crutch and a gimmick. Will the real filmmakers please stand up.



BigBaldIan said:


> All hyperbole aside, my mate Paddy sent me this email which I'd thought I'd share as it sums up pretty much the whole shebang in a fair manner.
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> The film itself was always more a testbed than a standalone story in itself - Yes Cameron worked his posterior off for the last decade but that was more in regard to the medium rather than the actual story itself, which as he has always maintained was used to tell a simple tale, albiet one where people have sat down and made as practical as possible (even with the Halleujah Mountains). Cameron's intention was to show 'this is possible' and push film into another development phase (e.g. silent to talkie, B&W to Colour, Celluoid to Digital, etc) and develop the art whilst giving cinemas another string to their bow in an age where it is more a chore to drag yourself to the local Odeon than flick a button or two on your sky box or DVD player.
> 
> What has happened is that people have responded to it well - when was the last time you were in the cinema and actually saw a line of people waiting to be let into a screen and the screens were packed out? Avatar the film, as a stand alone, certainly wouldn't be my vote for the greatest film in itself (story, acting, etc) but as a technical achievement it's on a par with the greatest and more than proven its point.



I stopped reading that when he used "itself" 3 times in as many sentences... poor form lmao. Now I shall go and read the rest...


----------



## xtrustisyoursx

TheClownPrince said:


> Ahh a good old fashioned misunderstanding, how I miss those...
> 
> To be blunt in my answer to you... "no".
> 
> To elaborate just a little, what annoys me is that they're pushing 3D on people who don't really want it. Yes, I'm aware some people seem to like it, as with most gimmicks... but honestly, take it away and I can't see all too many people crying all that many rivers. Simply because it's not pirateable (yet), it's forced on us. It isn't just Movies either, it's making it's way into gaming, another form of media I have a strong passionate love for.
> 
> 3D is and has always been a gimmick, I have no qualms whatsoever paying to go see a movie, but show me it in regular 2D for goodness sake, I don't want all this pointy pointy, bullets whiz past my face, creatures giant blue cock in my eye nonsense. I'm OK with a film here or there being 3D, especially kid's stuff as it keeps them entertained... but films are not better because of it. When I watch The Godfather or Blade Runner or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc, I don't think to myself "man... this would be so much better if it had 30% less colour saturation and everything was pointing out at me from the screen". Give me my proper films back, I don't give a fuck about your 3D shite Mr Cameron . I'm not saying pirating is good, I'm saying forcing 3D on people who don't want it just cause it can't be stolen by naughty people... is BAD!.
> 
> A great film should already be hugely immersive... 3D is a joke, a crutch and a gimmick. Will the real filmmakers please stand up.
> 
> 
> 
> I stopped reading that when he used "itself" 3 times in as many sentences... poor form lmao. Now I shall go and read the rest...



Have you actually seen Avatar? There was none of the normal gimmicky 3D stuff (which I also agree is lame). In my opinion, it was done very well, and not a novelty at all.


----------



## silentrage

Sir, you're aware that there is a non-3d version that you can choose to watch...


----------



## phantom911

Then maybe you should just not ever watch it, and not post in a thread that talks about it.


----------



## Arminius

TheClownPrince said:


> Ahh a good old fashioned giant blue cock in my eye



I wonder what the extended sex scene would be like in 3d erv:


----------



## Ben.Last

ZeroSignal said:


> I hate to break it to you, chief, but this film is also out quite extensively in 2D.



I hate to break it to you but I wasn't referring to Avatar specifically. I was referring to the fact that studios are now pushing directors to use 3D regardless of whether or not they want to. Aranofsky is probably going to drop out of the Robocop remake because the studio is trying to force him to go 3D. The next Bond is going to possibly be 3D. As well as Saw, Halloween and who knows what other movies that really have no need for the tech. Cameron wanted 3D for Avatar but when there's numerous examples of it being a studio choice rather than, and even sometimes running counter to, the artists' wishes, I find it to be a problem. That's my point.



On a separate note, way to not sign the neg rep, whoever sent it my way. It's nice to know that there's a twat like you out there who can't respect the fact that people have differing opinions.



BigBaldIan said:


> Depends on what your definition is, but that's the whole point. By not delineating what it means any counter argument can be immediately dismissed as "it's still not worth a damn by my non-existent definition of the term".
> 
> Ok try these for size then:
> 
> - A fundamental shift in the way we view movies. I'm not talking about red/blue 3d but proper full depth of perspective. In short, not only for what it is, but what will follow as a result of its technical breakthroughs.
> - The creation of a cultural phenomenon in the sci-fi community and in the wider movie going public.
> - The most succesful film of the decade in the shortest amount of time. There is the Twilight argument however but who are we to judge whether something is worth the price of admission?
> 
> And this is a way to get bums on seats. With home cinemas offering great quality at an affordable price point why see something in the cinema when you can just buy it later on Blu-Ray? Cinema has had to up its game and it just has, the "it's all just an anti-piracy scam" sounds just a tad paranoid in my humble opinion.
> 
> But since you've refused to define your terms, we can't really debate this any further can we?



Following what I stated earlier in my post. Qualify "worth a damn" as something that is purely for artistic presentation as opposed to, first and foremost, a business decision. Sure, films are a business, but there's been plenty of examples of artistic integrity that's managed to trump the money men. Again, my statements on 3D were NOT REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO AVATAR. If you'll notice, the post you're referring to does not mention Avatar at all. I merely mentioned the studio push for 3D.


----------



## silentrage

I don't know dude, I could argue that HD photography is not needed for artistic representation, nor is 35mm, you could make a good film with a handheld if you knew what you were doing, but that doesn't stop everyone from using the aforementioned tools. :/

If you think this is such a farce, what'll you do when full immersion holographic 3D projection comes out in theaters? @[email protected]


----------



## BigBaldIan

Lern2swim said:


> I hate to break it to you but I wasn't referring to Avatar specifically. I was referring to the fact that studios are now pushing directors to use 3D regardless of whether or not they want to. Aranofsky is probably going to drop out of the Robocop remake because the studio is trying to force him to go 3D. The next Bond is going to possibly be 3D. As well as Saw, Halloween and who knows what other movies that really have no need for the tech. Cameron wanted 3D for Avatar but when there's numerous examples of it being a studio choice rather than, and even sometimes running counter to, the artists' wishes, I find it to be a problem. That's my point.
> 
> 
> 
> On a separate note, way to not sign the neg rep, whoever sent it my way. It's nice to know that there's a twat like you out there who can't respect the fact that people have differing opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> Following what I stated earlier in my post. Qualify "worth a damn" as something that is purely for artistic presentation as opposed to, first and foremost, a business decision. Sure, films are a business, but there's been plenty of examples of artistic integrity that's managed to trump the money men. Again, my statements on 3D were NOT REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO AVATAR. If you'll notice, the post you're referring to does not mention Avatar at all. I merely mentioned the studio push for 3D.


 
Ok first of all, my apologies as I thought I signed that neg rep. I could've just hidden but like to think of myself as a no BS sort of guy and should do it as a matter of course. Differences of opinion I can handle great, brilliant they can be discussed but when they come in the form of opinions being veiled as "facts" it really gets my bloody goat ie not what you were saying but the way you were saying it. Thanks for explaining your position + rep coming your way at the first possible opportunity to make up for my - rep earlier. On reflection I was unfair in not allowing you to explain your stance further and unwarranted douchbaggery occurred. I can at least now see where you are coming from. 

I would argue that the anti-piracy angle is a factor but at best a secondary consideration. Cameron's films from The Abyss, Terminator 2, even Titanic have all been pushing boundaries of what cinema can do. This is no exception, he has taken and advanced the existing technology and used it as a (very expensive) proof of concept. The fact that it can't be pirated yet (no 3D blu-ray players on sale yet as far as I know) is just an incidental benefit.

Studios are always in it for the money as you have quite rightly mentioned. I would argue that getting bums in cinemas by providing something that is not available at home (yet) is more likely to be a primary motivation. The increased 3D sales (you can google the stats) have shown that it's something that the movie going public wants. Two other blockbusters to my knowledge are using the same technology already, Tron Legacy and Tintin. It's Red Queen evolution, cinema had been vying with home entertainment of the past few decades for customer $, so needed to come up with something to wow the customers.

Like any technology 3D should be there to enhance the story and with any paradigm shift in movie-making there is going to be a slew of imitators with less than stellar product trying to cash in. From a cinematography point of view Avatar has opened Pandora's Box (pun intended), let's just pray that we have hope left in the bottom afterwards.



TheClownPrince said:


> Ahh a good old fashioned misunderstanding, how I miss those...
> 
> To be blunt in my answer to you... "no".
> 
> To elaborate just a little, what annoys me is that they're pushing 3D on people who don't really want it. Yes, I'm aware some people seem to like it, as with most gimmicks... but honestly, take it away and I can't see all too many people crying all that many rivers. Simply because it's not pirateable (yet), it's forced on us. It isn't just Movies either, it's making it's way into gaming, another form of media I have a strong passionate love for.


 
People DO want it though, the 3D sales in North America and elsewhere support this. Punters have been paying extra money to see the 3D variant of Avatar (75%/25% split in favour of 3D in the States according to BusinessWeek, that's a comfortable majority the last time I looked not "some people"). YOU don't want 3D forced on you that much is blatently obvious, however the fact that both 2D and 3D versions of the film have been released makes your argument about as watertight and unsinkable as the Titanic. You have an option.



TheClownPrince said:


> 3D is and has always been a gimmick, I have no qualms whatsoever paying to go see a movie, but show me it in regular 2D for goodness sake, I don't want all this pointy pointy, bullets whiz past my face, creatures giant blue cock in my eye nonsense. I'm OK with a film here or there being 3D, especially kid's stuff as it keeps them entertained... but films are not better because of it. When I watch The Godfather or Blade Runner or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc, I don't think to myself "man... this would be so much better if it had 30% less colour saturation and everything was pointing out at me from the screen". Give me my proper films back, I don't give a fuck about your 3D shite Mr Cameron . I'm not saying pirating is good, I'm saying forcing 3D on people who don't want it just cause it can't be stolen by naughty people... is BAD!.
> 
> A great film should already be hugely immersive... 3D is a joke, a crutch and a gimmick. Will the real filmmakers please stand up.


 
Agree to some extent, a film is not intrinsically better because it's in 3D. To state what I believe to be the absolutely bloody obvious, the cinematography will always reflect the technology used at the time. Of course watching old classics in 3D is going to be a crap experience because they were not designed that way. As you evidently have been watching "In Pandora's Box" the low-grade straight to DVD porn remake and not Avatar, I can safely assure you that no bullets whizzed out of the screen in Avatar and no alien genetalia were seen.  It was used subtly to give long tracking shots depth of perspective.

Likewise I've compared 2 and 3D variants and there was no appreciable drop in colour saturation IMHO, certainly not to 30% or so. The only difference I noted was a slight degree of blurring in some of the very frenetic action scenes in 3D.

As I've mentioned a few times now, it is not being forced on anyone. Punters were given the option and they're paying in their droves to see something that they cannot repeat at home yet (and I do mean yet). For those who can't or don't want it, there is still the 2D option. That is what in all likelihood is driving the studio execs to use 3D, anti-piracy is just an incidental concern. As the technology matures it'll become more seemless and I predict in a few years what small drawbacks there are will be removed.

As for 3D as used in Avatar being a "joke" etc it's one with a $1.6bn punchline and rising. We get it, you don't like the technology or James Cameron hence the real filmmaker comment (out of interest whom do you class as a real filmmaker)? Of course there will be films that will overly rely on this, but the same thing can be said for modern special effects being used as a crutch or gimmick (I'm looking at Michael Bay here). Again your argument doesn't bear up to scrutiny, 3D is a special effect, no more or less so than any other. Films are sold on the 3D aspect in remarkably the same manner as they are sold on say "Zomg explosions and big robots!" Studios want backsides on seats, so anything they can do to differentiate their blockbuster from the next will be used. It's called a USP.



TheClownPrince said:


> I stopped reading that when he used "itself" 3 times in as many sentences... poor form lmao. Now I shall go and read the rest...


 
Well it was bashed out in a quick email to me, so I didn't have time to fully spell and grammar check. In short vote with your wallet, if you don't like it don't see it, but over the coming years you'll be missing out on so much if you insist on not seeing 3D films on principle.

Sheesh that was long. At the end of the day, it is only a film after all, fantastically successful on many levels but certainly nothing to get riled up about (myself included).


----------



## TheClownPrince

I like the old Jim Cameron... Aliens, Terminator, Terminator 2, The Abyss... I even quite like True Lies etc. Titanic is balls (and more proof that even over a decade ago people were willing to flock to something because of hype) though and aside from sumptuous visuals (in 2 OR 3 dimensions) Avatar is not really very good either.

People follow hype man, the hype on the 3D in Avatar has been on a monumental scale. People want a great movie and/or a great moveigoing experience. In my opinion you're more likely to get both with a finely made film that isn't hiding behind a gimmick, but has something highly thought provoking and emotional going on within it.

3D is set to invade our homes and our cinemas wether we truthfully want it to or not, and I find that deeply irritating (on a side note, have you taken a gander at the price of the new line of 3D TV's ?...). One film being more popular in 3D because of massive hype and expectation does not equate to "75% OF PEOPLE WANT 3D!". It equates to, "this movie's use of 3D has been hyped up so much that the majority of people are going to see it in 3D to see what all the fuss is about". You also seem to be underestimating what a substantial number that 25% is. 25% of millions upon millions of people, who reguardless of hype did not give a shite about 3D. And of that 75%, how many do you truly believe would state that they felt the film was far better by virtue of being in 3D ?.

I stand by what I said. 1. Avatar is a beautiful looking film with no substance and 2. 3D is still a gimmick and always will be. I'll give him credit though, he's done a fine job in making ludicrously high sums of money on less than stellar material.

Anyhoo, looks like we're destined to disagree on this so I'll leave it be. I have nothing further to add really. Agreeing to disagree seems like the grown up solution.

p.s. Yes, it's onlya film. But I adore film man, I love it... I don't want a gimmick to start ruining it for me. 3D gives me a headache and makes me nauseous, I refuse to allow it to become the norm on a majority of films. I don't want this whole "you're missing out" bullshit to rain down on me. Film should not be 3D, LIFE is 3D and it does it a million times better.


----------



## silentrage

I don't see how that's different from hating on planes because you get air sick.


----------



## TheClownPrince

silentrage said:


> I don't see how that's different from hating on planes because you get air sick.



Are you being stupid on purpose or for comedic effect ?... picking one reason from numerous to make a pointless point ?... gimme a break.


----------



## silentrage

It sounds to me like you're complaining about 3D simply because you don't like it, which is fine by me, we all have our likes and dislikes. 

My issue is that you try to make it sound like your specific distain with 3D films is justified o the grounds that 3D is just a gimmick. Yet in the same breath you say you enjoy regular 2D films. 

This is self contradictory because by your definition 2D must also be a gimmick, and by extension any kind of visuals at all fall into the same category. 
Before the invention of photography a good story could still be told through songs and words, if we go back further songs are gimmicks too because you don't technically need music to tell a story, it was just done through words. 



> I like the old Jim Cameron... Aliens, Terminator, Terminator 2, The Abyss... I even quite like True Lies etc. Titanic is balls (and more proof that even over a decade ago people were willing to flock to something because of hype) though and aside from sumptuous visuals (in 2 OR 3 dimensions) Avatar is not really very good either.


Those films had abundant amounts of digital visual effects, you have no problem with those gimmicks replacing traditional practical visual effects?


> People follow hype man, the hype on the 3D in Avatar has been on a monumental scale. People want a great movie and/or a great moveigoing experience. In my opinion you're more likely to get both with a finely made film that isn't hiding behind a gimmick, but has something highly thought provoking and emotional going on within it.


I don't personally believe Avatar would have been less successful without the 3D aspect. When I first heard about Avatar and saw the trailers, I didn't even know it was gonna be 3D, I think you're confusing the overall hype about the movie with the specific hype about 3D. It's hyped up alright, 100m marketing budget anyone?


> 3D is set to invade our homes and our cinemas wether we truthfully want it to or not, and I find that deeply irritating (on a side note, have you taken a gander at the price of the new line of 3D TV's ?...). One film being more popular in 3D because of massive hype and expectation does not equate to "75% OF PEOPLE WANT 3D!". It equates to, "this movie's use of 3D has been hyped up so much that the majority of people are going to see it in 3D to see what all the fuss is about". You also seem to be underestimating what a substantial number that 25% is. 25% of millions upon millions of people, who reguardless of hype did not give a shite about 3D. And of that 75%, how many do you truly believe would state that they felt the film was far better by virtue of being in 3D ?.


I personally don't give a shit, it's nice, it might add 10% to the visuals, if that, but I treat it as a natural progression of technology. Why are you making a deal out of it? 



> p.s. Yes, flying is only a way to travel. But I adore traveling man, I love it... I don't want a gimmick to start ruining it for me. Planes give me a headache and make me nauseous, I refuse to allow it to become the norm on a majority of traveling. I don't want this whole "you're missing out" bullshit to rain down on me. Traveling should not be by planes, Birds are planes and they do it a million times better.


Here's what this sounded like to me. 
Good ol' fear of progress.

If I misunderstand you then I apologize, but that's the general feel I got from your post. And yes, making stupid posts is just my thing, no offense intended. ^^


----------



## TheClownPrince

silentrage said:


> If I misunderstand you then I apologize



Appology accepted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJHX5ip68p4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMG75Ne398I


----------



## silentrage

Well, saw those, nothing you didn't already say, now care to rebutt any of the points I made?


----------



## sakeido

No, he can't really, because people aren't just seeing this movie in hordes - they actually love it, a lot. Audience reactions have been fantastic, some for just the 3D and visuals, but then there is a large portion of people who like the whole package.


----------



## Daemoniac

sakeido said:


> No, he can't really, because people aren't just seeing this movie in hordes - they actually love it, a lot. Audience reactions have been fantastic, some for just the 3D and visuals, but then there is a large portion of people who like the whole package.



I still haven't seen it, but on the whole I agree with that post.

No doubt the 3d has helped in some instances, but I know a lot of people who went to see it before they knew it was 3d, and loved it for _not just the 3D._ 

For the dude above, I sort of get what you're saying about the 3d, i'm not a big fan of it either (odds are this will change as it gets better mind you), but you were pretty god damn tactless in how you voiced your opinion


----------



## BigBaldIan

TheClownPrince said:


> Anyhoo, looks like we're destined to disagree on this so I'll leave it be. I have nothing further to add really. Agreeing to disagree seems like the grown up solution.


 
Fair enough, and since we're never going to know the breakdown of why punters made their choice, we're just going to be retreading the same ground. Discussion closed from my point of view.

Since the technology is here I only hope it advances to a point where it doesn't make you ill.

On a side note I haven't see 3D TVs or Blu Ray players for sale yet. I'm skipping going to HD until they're out though.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

So, I finally made the trek to the closest IMAX theatre to check out Avatar. What a let down. I drove 4-5 hours to watch it in 3d on a bigger screen, that happened to be filthy with spots and shit all over it. Definitely not worth the trek. I honestly don't see how it's any better than seeing it in regular 3d, I still couldn't focus on a lot of stuff. I can't wait for this to be out on Blu Ray because I love the movie.


----------



## Arminius

I've yet to have a positive imax experience either. It really just doesn't do anything for me


----------



## TheClownPrince

Demoniac said:


> but you were pretty god damn tactless in how you voiced your opinion



One second, I'm going to try really, REALLY hard to give a damn...

Bugger, I can't... sorry.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Mischa - go see the film!

TheClownPrince - stop being rude, no-one here has been rude to you.

JJ - glad you liked it! Sorry to hear about the IMAX fail


----------



## BigBaldIan

Looks like Avatar will break worldwide box office gross record by close of play today and the US record by end of week if it keeps up. Any bets on it getting to $2bn?

What is scary is that my mate Jim tried to get in to see it (bearing in mind 6 weeks after release) and shows were still sold out at both our local cinemas. I'd love to know how many of those are repeat business.


----------



## JakeRI

BigBaldIan said:


> Looks like Avatar will break worldwide box office gross record by close of play today and the US record by end of week if it keeps up. Any bets on it getting to $2bn?
> 
> What is scary is that my mate Jim tried to get in to see it (bearing in mind 6 weeks after release) and shows were still sold out at both our local cinemas. I'd love to know how many of those are repeat business.



all of them are haha


----------



## HighGain510

I went to the big United Artists Theatre in King of Prussia this weekend to see another movie and they had signs up everywhere that all IMAX 3D showings of Avatar were sold out until mid-day Sunday! Crazy!


----------



## BigBaldIan

IMAX in London has it showing until 25th Feb. That's going to be the next on the list to see it.


----------



## synrgy

*tried* to go see this in IMAX last night (probably would have been a let-down) and it was sold out. Still.

So, saw it in RealD again, and I gotta say -- 3rd time was just as good as the first.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Yeah, I bought my tickets (my friends and I made the trek) online like 2-3 days in advance. It was sold out the day before.


----------



## HighGain510

JJ Rodriguez said:


> So, I finally made the trek to the closest IMAX theatre to check out Avatar. What a let down. I drove 4-5 hours to watch it in 3d on a bigger screen, that happened to be filthy with spots and shit all over it. Definitely not worth the trek. I honestly don't see how it's any better than seeing it in regular 3d, I still couldn't focus on a lot of stuff. I can't wait for this to be out on Blu Ray because I love the movie.



I believe this turn of events took place strictly due to a cabinet you purchased recently that had a hex placed on it.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Shit, know of any ways I can get rid of it?


----------



## HighGain510

JJ Rodriguez said:


> Shit, know of any ways I can get rid of it?



None whatsoever. Enjoy your crappy IMAX experience!   

On a serious note, I went to some IMAX theater and had the same problem, it looked like someone threw something (large, full soda perhaps? ) at the screen and it splattered all over... so annoying that they didn't even bother to check it to see if it needed to be cleaned. For the cost of admission, you would think they would be checking that, but the next time I came by (like 2 months later) it was still there. I don't go to that theater anymore though so I guess it's no biggie.


----------



## JakeRI

saw it my fifth time last night. awesome. what is everyones count?


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Twice and that's good enough for me. I'm going to wait for it to come out on Blu-Ray so I can enjoy it in 2d


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Going to see this in 3D again soon!


----------



## phantom911

JakeRI said:


> saw it my fifth time last night. awesome. what is everyones count?



3 times. I saw it last at an Imax screen in Milwaukee. The sound quality was way better than when I saw it on a regular scene. During the final battle scenes the floor was shaking


----------



## BigBaldIan

Twice. I was actually one of the nutters who went to a preview showing the day before the release.

Now planning a trip to London to see it in Imax, which I'm hoping will bring the awesome.


----------



## sakeido

JakeRI said:


> saw it my fifth time last night. awesome. what is everyones count?



six times.. and I'll go at least one more time


----------



## HighGain510

Once in Real-D 3D, planning to go see it in IMAX-3D before they take it out of theatres.


----------



## Rick

One and done.


----------



## Sebastian

Rick said:


> none and done.


----------



## phaeded0ut

Once in IMAX 3D, twice in Digital 3D and I'm spent.  Love hearing folks comments coming out of the movie for the first time. 

Can't wait for the Blue-Ray release. Will be expecting James Cameron to re-edit/re-shoot/add/subtract scenes to this movie for years after. In other words, I'm expecting him to do the same thing that Ridley Scott did with "Bladerunner."


----------



## BigBaldIan

As of Jan 25th:

Domestic: * $554,981,691* *29.9%* + Foreign: * $1,303,885,198* *70.1%* = Worldwide: * $1,858,866,889* 
Cameron has done it. I expect the domestic (U.S.) record to fall by start of play next week.


----------



## phaeded0ut

I don't know about that BigBaldIan, I've got a feeling that it'll be dropping a little bit in all of the different markets, but considering that one has to order tickets in advance by a little less than a week at the the real IMAX theaters (at least in my area) still... It's damn impressive that it made this amount of money in a very short period of time. This time, James Cameron isn't saying that he's, "King of the World!" LOL!


----------



## BigBaldIan

phaeded0ut said:


> I don't know about that BigBaldIan, I've got a feeling that it'll be dropping a little bit in all of the different markets, but considering that one has to order tickets in advance by a little less than a week at the the real IMAX theaters (at least in my area) still... It's damn impressive that it made this amount of money in a very short period of time. This time, James Cameron isn't saying that he's, "King of the World!" LOL!



Admittedly it is starting to show signs of slow down but based on previous figures pulling in $5 to $8 million a day for each weekday and maybe $25 million over a weekend may well see it clear.

Edit: Just taken a look at the actual figures for this week. May well be into next week before it gets there say $3million for Monday through Thursday = $12million. Friday will add say another $8million possibly then say $20 or so million over the weekend. So could be Tuesday or Wednesday next week before that record falls.


----------



## Winspear

Got taken to see this lastnight - truly awesome, will definately see again. Contemplating IMAX


----------



## Mattayus

Saw it on Wednesday night, totally surpassed my expectations, amazing!


----------



## estabon37

Sorry guys, didn't do much for me. Maybe if it was 45 mins shorter I'd have enjoyed it more.


----------



## jaredowty

The visuals were of course amazing and the characters were likable, but I just feel this type of story has already been told a million times and the movie was a total snoozefest. IMO.


----------



## BigBaldIan

Looking at the weekend figures it would seem that the domestic record looks likely to fall on Tuesday. Currently wondering whether it will get close to 2.5 or even 3 billion now. Idle speculation but nothing seems to be getting close at the moment in terms of box office competition.


----------



## Spinedriver

cataclysm_child said:


>



Priceless !!!!! 

Everyone said the same thing about Titanic being 'unbeatable' at the box office when it came out. It's a bit annoying hearing every day on the news how much Avatar is making but at the same time you have to consider that when Titanic was released, tickets were something like $5.50 - $7.50 (I'm guessing but it was somewhere near that and the lower price being matinees & 'cheap nights'). Avatar tickets are $10 - $14 a pop, so everyone that's clamoring about how much money it's making only has to wait another 10 years when movie tickets will be $25 and then Avatar's record will be shattered by Alvin and The Chipmunks 8 : Theodore Goes Rabid

All that being said, the only constant I can find in everyone's opinion about the movie is the digital effects. All the talk is about how 'good' it looks, not the plot, acting or anything else. I can't remember the company name, but if they took the Myst game, animated it in 3D and put it on the big screen, they could make a fortune because it was 'pretty to look at' too.

The sad thing is that for all of the really good movies that came out last year, Avatar will most likely win "Best Picture" at the Oscars... 


I just can't wait until George Lucas decides to re-release Phantom Menace in 3D and the rave reviews will start pouring in about how such an amazing movie could have been so harshly criticized when it first came out.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Spinedriver said:


> wank



Have you seen the film?

If you have, watch this: 


If you haven't then don't pass judgement on something you haven't seen.

And seriously, what the hell is wrong with people that they have to constantly bitch about this film? Seriously, you guys are worse than the anti-djent brigade. 

EDIT: I mean, sweet zombie Jesus, there wasn't this much bitching when The Last Samurai came out. I mean, it's a classic story for a reason. Pocahontas (several hundred years ago), Dances With Wolves, The Last Samurai and Avatar all have similar stories. Get a fucking grip guys. It's getting tiresome. *Headdesk*

EDIT2: I'd also like to point out that MANY people enjoyed the acting and the plot. The plot contains so many psychological, ecological and spiritual metaphors and is incredibly concise with no filler despite being 3hrs long. I also thought that Lang and Saldana's acting was excellent. Worthington and Ribisi also did a very good job too.


----------



## Spinedriver

I did watch it and it was an ok movie, not the worst movie I've ever seen by a long shot. However, I just find that the media hype surrounding it as if it's the new benchmark for all movies to aspire to is a bit overblown.

I'm just saying that had it NOT been in 3D, I don't think such a fuss would have been made.


----------



## synrgy

Spinedriver said:


> I did watch it and it was an ok movie, not the worst movie I've ever seen by a long shot. However, I just find that the media hype surrounding it as if it's the new benchmark for all movies to aspire to is a bit overblown.
> 
> I'm just saying that had it NOT been in 3D, I don't think such a fuss would have been made.



There are several posts in this thread alone talking about how amazing it looks in regular old 2D. Just sayin.


----------



## sakeido

Spinedriver said:


> I did watch it and it was an ok movie, not the worst movie I've ever seen by a long shot. However, I just find that the media hype surrounding it as if it's the new benchmark for all movies to aspire to is a bit overblown.
> 
> I'm just saying that had it NOT been in 3D, I don't think such a fuss would have been made.



It was filmed to look as good in 2D as it did in 3D, and I personally think it looks better that way. That said, it never would have existed without 3D.. so what is the point of even saying "if it was 2D?" That's not an argument, or a valid point, or anything other than just braindead hate


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Witnessing epic blue sideboob in 3D again tomorrow evening


----------



## BigBaldIan

Scar Symmetry said:


> Witnessing epic blue sideboob in 3D again tomorrow evening



Gotta love those strategically placed shells!


----------



## pink freud

BigBaldIan said:


> Gotta love those strategically placed shells!



You just KNOW that the designers have a few "personal" CGI models of their own.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

pink freud said:


> You just KNOW that the designers have a few "personal" CGI models of their own.



Well yeah, I highly doubt that the Neytiri we got to see was the final draft.


----------



## Winspear

Scar Symmetry said:


> Witnessing epic blue sideboob in 3D again tomorrow evening



As am I  Enjoy!


----------



## sakeido

Scar Symmetry said:


> Well yeah, I highly doubt that the Neytiri we got to see was the final draft.



The one we got is better.. the draft sculpture has no nipples at all. The movie version most def does


----------



## MF_Kitten

i really enjoyed the movie for it´s content, not for it´s visuals. the thing about the visuals though, is that they never detract from the story. they keep the scale as huge as the story wants it to be. so i think the visuals are important to the movie, but not because the story sucks by itself.

i got a little irritated when i left the movie theatre and people were all "dude, that was awesome! it all looked totally real and shit!"

the reason this movie is getting flak is because it´s popular. if you don´t get it, then you´ll find all the praise to be total bullshit. you know when there´s a band that everyone praises in every way, yet when you listen to it, it´s nothing special at all? yeah, that´s pretty much it. you either like something or you don´t.

as with EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD, it´s not the story and plot of avatar alone that makes it good. it´s the fact that it´s performed and presented so damn good that makes it awesome. the same goes for music on a million different levels, it goes for all tv shows and all movies ever. it´s not WHAT, it´s HOW.


----------



## BigBaldIan

MF_Kitten said:


> i really enjoyed the movie for it´s content, not for it´s visuals. the thing about the visuals though, is that they never detract from the story. they keep the scale as huge as the story wants it to be. so i think the visuals are important to the movie, but not because the story sucks by itself.
> 
> i got a little irritated when i left the movie theatre and people were all "dude, that was awesome! it all looked totally real and shit!"
> 
> the reason this movie is getting flak is because it´s popular. if you don´t get it, then you´ll find all the praise to be total bullshit. you know when there´s a band that everyone praises in every way, yet when you listen to it, it´s nothing special at all? yeah, that´s pretty much it. you either like something or you don´t.
> 
> as with EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD, it´s not the story and plot of avatar alone that makes it good. it´s the fact that it´s performed and presented so damn good that makes it awesome. the same goes for music on a million different levels, it goes for all tv shows and all movies ever. it´s not WHAT, it´s HOW.



Well said sir. Rep coming your way.


----------



## ZeroSignal

MF_Kitten said:


> i really enjoyed the movie for it´s content, not for it´s visuals. the thing about the visuals though, is that they never detract from the story. they keep the scale as huge as the story wants it to be. so i think the visuals are important to the movie, but not because the story sucks by itself.
> 
> i got a little irritated when i left the movie theatre and people were all "dude, that was awesome! it all looked totally real and shit!"
> 
> the reason this movie is getting flak is because it´s popular. if you don´t get it, then you´ll find all the praise to be total bullshit. you know when there´s a band that everyone praises in every way, yet when you listen to it, it´s nothing special at all? yeah, that´s pretty much it. you either like something or you don´t.
> 
> as with EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD, it´s not the story and plot of avatar alone that makes it good. it´s the fact that it´s performed and presented so damn good that makes it awesome. the same goes for music on a million different levels, it goes for all tv shows and all movies ever. it´s not WHAT, it´s HOW.



You hit the nail 110% on the head, el Duderino.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Just got back from seeing it again.

Maybe seeing it the second time was a mistake, because this time round I realised how dire the script was.

I enjoyed the third act more this time round though.


----------



## BigBaldIan

Domestic:* $601,142,000* *29.0%*+ Foreign:* $1,473,548,945* *71.0%*= Worldwide:* $2,074,690,945*

Final record broken. Although if you look at adjusted $ it'll need to get 1.5bn domestic to beat Gone With the Wind.


----------



## ZeroSignal

BigBaldIan said:


> Domestic:* $601,142,000* *29.0%*+ Foreign:* $1,473,548,945* *71.0%*= Worldwide:* $2,074,690,945*
> 
> Final record broken. Although if you look at adjusted $ it'll need to get 1.5bn domestic to beat Gone With the Wind.



Very true. But I still think the result is impressive considering that the film was released while the world was in the grip of a global economic recession and, on top of that, it was around the Christmas period when there is even less disposable income available to the layman.


----------



## BigBaldIan

Interesting to see the Academy Award nominations it's up for:

*ACADEMY AWARDS NOMINATIONS*
*Picture*
*Director*: James Cameron
*Editing*
*Cinematography*
*Art Direction*
*Visual Effects*
*Sound*
*Sound Editing*
*Original Score

*Barring Picture and Director all in the technical categories.


----------



## ZeroSignal

BigBaldIan said:


> Interesting to see the Academy Award nominations it's up for:
> 
> *ACADEMY AWARDS NOMINATIONS*
> *Picture*
> *Director*: James Cameron
> *Editing*
> *Cinematography*
> *Art Direction*
> *Visual Effects*
> *Sound*
> *Sound Editing*
> *Original Score
> 
> *Barring Picture and Director all in the technical categories.



I'd like to point out that _THREE_ Irish lads are nominated for Oscars and they all went to the small College I'm going to next year.


----------



## BigBaldIan

ZeroSignal said:


> I'd like to point out that _THREE_ Irish lads are nominated for Oscars and they all went to the small College I'm going to next year.



Name names and films responsible for!


----------



## ZeroSignal

Hopefully I'll being going again this week... That'll be number 7 for those of you not keeping count! 



BigBaldIan said:


> Name names and films responsible for!



My bad. Make that 5 nominees... 

Irish have five stars at Oscar nominations - The Irish Times - Wed, Feb 03, 2010


----------



## TheClownPrince

Since you guys were so adamant, I watched it again... and alright, it's not quite as bad as I thought. I don't love it, but it's fine, I don't hate it. 3D can still suckle my testicles though.

Furthermore... (since this double posted)

If you guys have a problem taking things with a pinch of salt or swallowing someone elses opinions on a fucking forum (opinions you don't have to give a second thought to if you don't want to) or if you simply enjoy crying, then take it up with me in PM instead of anonymous pussy-ass bad feedback. I don't give a damn about the feedback, but the anonymous pussy side is pathetic.


----------



## BigBaldIan

On a side note people complaining about the plot lead me to an interesting work by Georges Polti entitled The Thirty-six Dramatic Situations. In this he proposes that there are only 36 basic plots and every story is a variant thereof.

Internet Archive: Free Download: The thirty-six dramatic situations


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Interesting...

That's what makes me appreciate truly original ideas.


----------



## TheClownPrince

Yay more negative rep from an anyonymous dickhead. AWESOMEZ!


----------



## BigBaldIan

TheClownPrince said:


> Yay more negative rep from an anyonymous dickhead. AWESOMEZ!


 
Danny it's not what you're saying but how you're saying it. We've managed to have a perfectly reasonable difference of opinion and have argued the points pretty well IMHO. Compared to a lot of places I'd say this forum has a low tolerance level and you need to modify your behaviour accordingly.



Scar Symmetry said:


> Interesting...
> 
> That's what makes me appreciate truly original ideas.


 
It's an excellent work I think, by using that you can break down pretty much any film, play or novel into it's basic themes. In some respects it's the Aarne-Thompson classification system but broken down into even more basic blocks.
Aarne-Thompson classification system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It may also be the great-grandfather of current TV Tropes.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

I wonder if the favourite films of the people who have said that Avatar's story has been done to death have basic stories, they're just unaware of it?

I read this the other day:

11 reasons Avatar SHOULD win Best Picture

I found that I wholeheartedly disagreed with all of the points bar 1, 2, 3 and 11.


----------



## Arminius

Probably old, but I didn't see it in this thread.







Should make the DVD


----------



## ZeroSignal

Scar Symmetry said:


> I wonder if the favourite films of the people who have said that Avatar's story has been done to death have basic stories, they're just unaware of it?
> 
> I read this the other day:
> 
> 11 reasons Avatar SHOULD win Best Picture
> 
> I found that I wholeheartedly disagreed with all of the points bar 1, 2, 3 and 11.



I actually agree with 6 and 7.  Not the Iraq comment for the most part. Especially since indigenous tribes are being forced off their lands by mining companies all the time.



Aysakh said:


> Probably old, but I didn't see it in this thread.
> 
> Should make the DVD



That hasn't been posted yet, so good find. 

That scene was in the original script.


----------



## Scar Symmetry

Director's Cut better be goddamn awesome


----------



## BigBaldIan

ZeroSignal said:


> I actually agree with 6 and 7.  Not the Iraq comment for the most part. Especially since indigenous tribes are being forced off their lands by mining companies all the time.
> 
> 
> 
> That hasn't been posted yet, so good find.
> 
> That scene was in the original script.





Spoiler



The opening scene in the bar, when he delivers a beatdown on some douchebag then gets thrown out?


----------



## Arminius

BigBaldIan said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> The opening scene in the bar, when he delivers a beatdown on some douchebag then gets thrown out?





Spoiler



Yeah, after he takes up for the girl or whatever



I've been looking for more pics, no luck so far 

Edit: I think I found a few.


----------



## ZeroSignal

Ah dammit. It looks like they left in that Tseutey death scene from the original script. I'm not a happy camper... 

I found these videos very interesting, especially for the 3D nay-sayers, people who want to know about the sequel and Cameron's Oscar ambitions:

James Cameron Says Grammys Did 3-D Wrong | Video | MTV

James Cameron Discusses His Chances On Oscar Night | Video | MTV

James Cameron Says Everyone Is Highly Motivated To Do 'Avatar 2' | Video | MTV

All the videos in that playlist are worth watching, though.

EDIT: These are also quite good. Part four in particular shows that they really put an emphasis on the quality of acting and it wasn't just half assed.


----------



## TheClownPrince

BigBaldIan said:


> Danny it's not what you're saying but how you're saying it. We've managed to have a perfectly reasonable difference of opinion and have argued the points pretty well IMHO. Compared to a lot of places I'd say this forum has a low tolerance level and you need to modify your behaviour accordingly.



That's sort of what annoyed me mate, you and I were having a perfectly fair and well meaning debate on the merits (or lack of) of the movie and of 3D in general, and someone came in and began telling me what to do, how to speak and how to behave. It rather pissed me off as until that point I had done little I'd deem wrong. When people read subtle sarcasm and/or humour on a computer screen, they usually fail to understand or appreciate it. I don't take kindly to the provocation that usually comes my way when someone seems to go out of their way to misunderstand me, I don't think anyone does. And since it's not a site I frequent, I felt free enough to tell them to piss off. That whole anonymous stuff really ruffled my feathers alot... but you know what ?... bugger it. I'm a geordie, so forgiving and forgetting is part and parcel of life.

BAFTAS tonight, I wonder who the big winners will be, I can't recall if Avatar is up for any awards, but I imagine it is. Should be interesting.


----------



## synrgy

So I bought the DVD for this tonight, and I started half watching it (it's on while I do chores around the apartment, basically) but I sat down for a moment, and I have a gift for the rest of you:

If you have the DVD/Blueray/Whatever:

PAUSE IT AT EXACTLY 35:58. Maybe zoom in, if you feel so inclined.

You're welcome.


----------



## Arminius

synrgy said:


> PAUSE IT AT EXACTLY 35:58. Maybe zoom in, if you feel so inclined.
> 
> You're welcome.



For those of us who do not have the dvd yet, can you give us a hint?


----------



## Ben.Last

My assumption would be alien nip slip.


----------



## sentagoda

Avatar is acutally one of the worst movies i have seen. Story wise it should have been slaugthered. Picturewise is amazing, but movie had a budget that many countries would dream of, so i kinda expected insane picture. But a rotten story with cheesy dialouge and acting.


----------



## Edika

sentagoda said:


> Avatar is acutally one of the worst movies i have seen. Story wise it should have been slaugthered. Picturewise is amazing, but movie had a budget that many countries would dream of, so i kinda expected insane picture. But a rotten story with cheesy dialouge and acting.



I agree. 
I was amazed by the visual effects and the whole concept of the alien world. But the 3D technology is not that amazing yet! It was interesting but I could see it that it was like 3 levels of depth and not exactly 3D. Maybe I am being too harsh since this is the blooming of a new technology in films but for me the reaction of most people was like when most of us our first 200-300$ guitar, it was the best guitar ever.
Now the story was a collage of different movies and novels that was ground up to an over-simplistic story. Even animated pictures for kids below 12 have more subtlety in their message. And I am sure it was rated for people over 16. It is an enjoyable movie but nothing more than that, even though I expected to escalate to the levels of stupidity that followed the DaVinci Code.


----------



## synrgy

Lern2swim said:


> My assumption would be alien nip slip.



*ding ding!*

Though, it's not just a slip; It's an official fully.


----------



## pink freud

synrgy said:


> *ding ding!*
> 
> Though, it's not just a slip; It's an official fully.



Just one more step in the Great Furry Conspiracy.


----------



## RenegadeDave

I got the DVD. I appreciated it more on subsequent viewings in 2d. 

How many months before Christmas do you think it will be before they release the 3D version? 

I still don't get how people hate on the story so much. yes, it is generic, but read anything about the Universal Myth and realize that basically every movie you've seen and liked is straight from the universal myth/hero of a thousand faces. It's all been done to death. What Avatar has going for it is it's delivered so well, there is no dead time on screen. Every millisecond in frame contributes to the momentum of the story and the suspense is incredibly well paced. That's probably more a credit to tasteful editing more than anything but lots of modern film makers could learn a thing or two from this film. 

I didn't pick up on the parallelism between the scientists in the Avatar program and the soldiers with their powered exoskeletons the very first time. Ultimately, the final battle comes down to a showdown between an avatar and an exo and is decided by a local. 

Side note: I like how almost all of the species are some kind of mammal/reptile/ sometimes even insect hybrid. As imaginative as the fauna were, it seems like it fell to the same formula "give it another set of appendages, give it nostrils on it's chest, give it vivid coloring or bioluminesence". the flora was convincingly done as well.


----------



## shredfreak

Edika said:


> I agree.
> I was amazed by the visual effects and the whole concept of the alien world. But the 3D technology is not that amazing yet! It was interesting but I could see it that it was like 3 levels of depth and not exactly 3D. Maybe I am being too harsh since this is the blooming of a new technology in films but for me the reaction of most people was like when most of us our first 200-300$ guitar, it was the best guitar ever.
> Now the story was a collage of different movies and novels that was ground up to an over-simplistic story. Even animated pictures for kids below 12 have more subtlety in their message. And I am sure it was rated for people over 16. It is an enjoyable movie but nothing more than that, even though I expected to escalate to the levels of stupidity that followed the DaVinci Code.



Kinda checked it out to see if it was as good as most ppl say but it seems all bling bling & not story at all. Huge dissapointment.


----------



## vampiregenocide

I really liked it mostly because I'm into that sorts sci fi aliens shit.


----------



## DeathMetalDean

I just watched the movie last night, thought it was deadly


----------



## Mexi

Just saw it last week, thought it was a pretty entertaining film. Certainly set the bar for visual effects though, though since I saw it on DvD, I'm not sure how much of the experience of the film was lost w/o 3D. That being said, I felt it was pretty overrated overall as a story (as its nothing groundbreaking) and felt it kinda forced by the end, but still good. 3.5/5


----------



## sentagoda

for me having seen it in both. 3d did not really do it for me. even tough its filmed in 3d


----------



## sakeido

After seeing it in 3D and on Bluray.. I like the 1080p 2D Bluray version a lot more


----------



## Choop

When I first saw this film, I thought it was absolutely amazing at the theater. In retrospect, the more and more I thought about it, the less and less I liked it. There is little that is truly original about the film, however the presentation is what really gets you and makes it stand out. Pretty visuals I guess, plus I really like watching movies in 3D! 

Definitely not a 'bad' movie. It's still enjoyable to watch. It's fun to imagine this world and rejecting human exploitation etcetc. I just want to say, that I've heard that Avatar is comparable to Star Wars, as though it's 'this generation's Star Wars,' and that just doesn't seem to fit it for me. Avatar wasn't the massive phenomenon that Star Wars was (and still is really).

I also would now like an Avatar cab in blue tolex. I'd dress it up like a Na'vi, and it could meld with my vicious beast Mesa rectifier! :V


----------



## MacTown09

synrgy said:


> *ding ding!*
> 
> Though, it's not just a slip; It's an official fully.



Pics or it didnt happen


----------



## sakeido

Choop said:


> Avatar wasn't the massive phenomenon that Star Wars was (and still is really).



sorry, but you are objectively wrong on this point


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> sorry, but you are objectively wrong on this point



No, he's not. You can say he's subjectively wrong (meaning simply that you disagree). But fact of the matter is that history will be the best judge of this. 

I, personally, don't think that Avatar will stand the test of time anywhere near as well as Star Wars has. I don't think it's even arguable that it's anywhere near the cultural phenomenon that Star Wars was. Even if you simply want to state that it is due to being the highest grossing movie ever, I'd first disagree about that proving the point (Titanic WAS the highest grossing and it was nowhere near the cultural phenomenon that SW was) but I'd go on to point out that there's a lot going on with the numbers themselves that's debatable (inflation, 3D ticket cost, etc).

You can say that this is partly due to the way that society and filmgoing has changed. I'd agree. Whereas when SW came out people got one, maybe 2, blockbusters a year, we're now saturated with new films (and media in general) to occupy the public's eye. So, rather than be a big part of the public consciousness for years, I really do feel that Avatar will be off of the societal radar (if you don't want to say it is already, which I'd also argue) by next summer. It's simply a fact of the way media works now. Things are much more quickly discarded.


----------



## sakeido

Lern2swim said:


> No, he's not. You can say he's subjectively wrong (meaning simply that you disagree). But fact of the matter is that history will be the best judge of this.
> 
> I, personally, don't think that Avatar will stand the test of time anywhere near as well as Star Wars has. I don't think it's even arguable that it's anywhere near the cultural phenomenon that Star Wars was. Even if you simply want to state that it is due to being the highest grossing movie ever, I'd first disagree about that proving the point (Titanic WAS the highest grossing and it was nowhere near the cultural phenomenon that SW was) but I'd go on to point out that there's a lot going on with the numbers themselves that's debatable (inflation, 3D ticket cost, etc).
> 
> You can say that this is partly due to the way that society and filmgoing has changed. I'd agree. Whereas when SW came out people got one, maybe 2, blockbusters a year, we're now saturated with new films (and media in general) to occupy the public's eye. So, rather than be a big part of the public consciousness for years, I really do feel that Avatar will be off of the societal radar (if you don't want to say it is already, which I'd also argue) by next summer. It's simply a fact of the way media works now. Things are much more quickly discarded.



first things first, even when adjusted for inflation Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time worldwide... In NA its top 15 which ain't bad. As you pointed out, SW was the first real blockbuster. Now Avatar didn't have _too_ much competition, but even in more saturated modern movie markets it still destroyed all of its competition and stayed at #1 for weeks. 

Did people have Jedi weddings the year Star Wars came out? Probably not. If that is what you are talking about when you say "phenomenon" then that takes years to develop and that isn't what I'm talking about right now, because nobody can comment on that with any legitimacy. 

Did people turn out to see Star Wars droves? Yes. Did people turn out to see Avatar in droves? Yes, By God they did like they haven't in years... and you can't deny that. 

So, he's objectively wrong in the sense I assumed we were talking about.

We are also comparing a 30 year old franchise of six movies, a couple hundred books, comics, TV shows and so on to a seven month old standalone movie with a couple companion coffee table books. We are comparing something _we grew up with_ to something brand new... how can anybody compare the two yet?


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Not only that, isn't he making a trilogy since it did well? Hard to say what's going to happen with those. Might be bigger than Star Wars in 30 years (and this is coming from a Star Wars nerd).


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> first things first, even when adjusted for inflation Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time worldwide... In NA its top 15 which ain't bad. As you pointed out, SW was the first real blockbuster. Now Avatar didn't have _too_ much competition, but even in more saturated modern movie markets it still destroyed all of its competition and stayed at #1 for weeks.
> 
> Did people have Jedi weddings the year Star Wars came out? Probably not. If that is what you are talking about when you say "phenomenon" then that takes years to develop and that isn't what I'm talking about right now, because nobody can comment on that with any legitimacy.
> 
> Did people turn out to see Star Wars droves? Yes. Did people turn out to see Avatar in droves? Yes, By God they did like they haven't in years... and you can't deny that.
> 
> So, he's objectively wrong in the sense I assumed we were talking about.
> 
> We are also comparing a 30 year old franchise of six movies, a couple hundred books, comics, TV shows and so on to a seven month old standalone movie with a couple companion coffee table books. We are comparing something _we grew up with_ to something brand new... how can anybody compare the two yet?



As I said, "fact of the matter is that history will be the best judge of this." Also, as I said, for a variety of reasons, I don't think it's going to have the staying power of SW. He obviously doesn't either. Since no one can see into the future any statements supporting or against this are... yes... subjective. 

The phenomenon of SW is one that I don't feel was just cinematic but cultural (most would surely agree). While I think that, sure, Avatar was a phenom cinematically, culturally I don't think it even approaches the level of SW. We're not just talking about people going to theaters in droves. If that were the case we'd have to say Titanic is as big a phenomenon as SW (maybe more so since it also won oscars. See, all very subjective). 

Also, just curious, has anyone done the numbers adjusted for the extra cost of the 3D showings? I read one quote saying it would have dropped it's domestic gross from 750 to 500. I don't know if that's accurate or if the person just did the math as though every ticket had been a 3D one.


----------



## arktan

JJ Rodriguez said:


> Not only that, isn't he making a trilogy since it did well? Hard to say what's going to happen with those. Might be bigger than Star Wars in 30 years (and this is coming from a Star Wars nerd).



Blasphemy!!! Lord Vader will be very disappointed.


----------



## synrgy

JJ Rodriguez said:


> Not only that, isn't he making a trilogy since it did well? Hard to say what's going to happen with those. Might be bigger than Star Wars in 30 years (and this is coming from a Star Wars nerd).



OR it could end up going the other way, a-la the Matrix; People pour into theaters to watch part 2, leave disappointed, and then part 3 ends up with comparably lackluster sales and mediocre reviews at best..

Time will tell.

I can say this: I already got rid of the DVD. I saw the film 3 times in the theaters, and when I brought home the DVD it was all I could do to pay attention for 5-10 minutes before wanting to do something else entirely. I'm starting to wonder if it's going to stand the test of time for me at all.

It doesn't help that the Blue Ray version on an HDTV looks like a video game whenever no humans are on screen, to me.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez

Looks just fine on my 42" LCD at 1080p 

I know what you mean though, sometimes people just get burnt out on movies/shows. I think it definitely has the potential to be an excellent trilogy if they do it right.


----------



## sakeido

Lern2swim said:


> As I said, "fact of the matter is that history will be the best judge of this." Also, as I said, for a variety of reasons, I don't think it's going to have the staying power of SW. He obviously doesn't either. Since no one can see into the future any statements supporting or against this are... yes... subjective.
> 
> The phenomenon of SW is one that I don't feel was just cinematic but cultural (most would surely agree). While I think that, sure, Avatar was a phenom cinematically, culturally I don't think it even approaches the level of SW. We're not just talking about people going to theaters in droves. If that were the case we'd have to say Titanic is as big a phenomenon as SW (maybe more so since it also won oscars. See, all very subjective).
> 
> Also, just curious, has anyone done the numbers adjusted for the extra cost of the 3D showings? I read one quote saying it would have dropped it's domestic gross from 750 to 500. I don't know if that's accurate or if the person just did the math as though every ticket had been a 3D one.



thanks for reading my post carefully. We are not talking about the same thing.


----------



## synrgy

JJ Rodriguez said:


> Looks just fine on my 42" LCD at 1080p



There's just something about the blue-ray on a large HD screen that throws me off. It's *too* pristine. Because the shots without humans are basically 100% digital, that's exactly what it looks like; 100% digital. The DVD looked totally normal to me, but the blue-ray is just too damn clean for it's own good. The first time I walked into a Best Buy and saw the film on display, I honestly thought it had to have been the video game. When I realized it wasn't, I was definitely left .

IMHO, of course.


----------



## pink freud

JJ Rodriguez said:


> Not only that, isn't he making a trilogy since it did well? Hard to say what's going to happen with those. Might be bigger than Star Wars in 30 years (and this is coming from a Star Wars nerd).



Hard to say. Star Wars is bigger than the average person really knows, because of the novels and such. I'm a passive SW fan, and I know that there is a _lot_ of cannon (or fannon, if the extended universe is counted as such) that I don't know about. Avatar has the same potential for universe expansion, but I doubt it will happen to the extent that SW did. It's kind of like how there won't be another Beatles. SW set the paradigm, and everything after it is less successful.


----------



## Ben.Last

sakeido said:


> thanks for reading my post carefully. We are not talking about the same thing.



I don't know if you intended that to be sarcastic. I read your post carefully. You're boiling the idea of a film being a phenomenon a la SW down to a lot of people going to see it ("in droves"). Not only did I address why I don't think that that's all there is to it, I also addressed why, from that standard, you'd have to possibly consider Titanic a phenomenon of the same level of SW or more. I also addressed why the idea of his statement being objectively wrong is incorrect.

(edit: and this is the last thing I'm going to post about it as it's fairly off topic and I don't want to derail things into bickering about semantics)


----------



## Marv Attaxx

synrgy said:


> There's just something about the blue-ray on a large HD screen that throws me off. It's *too* pristine. Because the shots without humans are basically 100% digital, that's exactly what it looks like; 100% digital. The DVD looked totally normal to me, but the blue-ray is just too damn clean for it's own good. The first time I walked into a Best Buy and saw the film on display, I honestly thought it had to have been the video game. When I realized it wasn't, I was definitely left .
> 
> IMHO, of course.


For me it was the exact opposite 
Watched it on DVD and thought that everything looked just...unreal 
On the other hand the Blu-ray-Version looks great and much more inartificial imho. On my 37" 1080-TV the movie looks as good as the cinema-version (Wasn't the 3D HD version delivered on Blu-Ray Disks? Or harddrives?)


----------



## sakeido

Lern2swim said:


> I don't know if you intended that to be sarcastic. I read your post carefully. You're boiling the idea of a film being a phenomenon a la SW down to a lot of people going to see it ("in droves"). Not only did I address why I don't think that that's all there is to it, I also addressed why, from that standard, you'd have to possibly consider Titanic a phenomenon of the same level of SW or more. I also addressed why the idea of his statement being objectively wrong is incorrect.
> 
> (edit: and this is the last thing I'm going to post about it as it's fairly off topic and I don't want to derail things into bickering about semantics)



No, its not off topic.

For something to be a cultural phenomenon, it needs to get a big audience; Star Wars did, so did Avatar. He was talking past tense, as if Avatar was never a big deal - and he was objectively wrong on that point. It was a _huge_ success, much the same way Star Wars was. Whether you like it or not, the two have had roughly the same amount of initial success.

For it to go further, which is what you are talking about, people need to pick it up and run with it; obviously this happened with SW, and there are early indications of a very dedicated Avatar fandom springing up. The potential is certainly there. You've got all the right ingredients.. Trying to project where Avatar is going to end up right now is a fool's errand.


----------



## Explorer

The more easily something is emulated, the more the nerds/geeks will embrace it.

So, if one talks about "the Force," it's going to be hard to say, dude, you're fooling yourself. It takes a while for someone for master the Force in the movies, so it's easy to pretend.

If someone is talking about how we might be living in the Matrix, it's easy to say, dude, show me how you can alter the laws of physics like in the movie. Fail!

Star Trek? Normal people in costumes, for the most part. 

Avatar? No real-world examples of some world hippie spirit working in an obvious way, and definitely no wildlife resembling that of the movie, so there's no way for someone to really geek out on the movie in a big way.

And, to be even colder but honest, you need to be in shape to even attempt to slather yourself in blue like the Avatar folks, while you only a robe at minimum for Star Wars. *laugh*

I always feel kind of bad for the folks who go to the anime conventions around here, dressing up like someone who can do amazing things in the cartoons, and yet never being able to actually do them. I remember bildering and working on balance-walking when I was younger, and loved free climbing until I almost fell some ridiculous distance and decided that the rush wasn't worth death. *laugh* I'm kind of surprised that parkour hasn't really taken off in a huge way, because it alway seemed like the next skateboard-type activity to me, cheap and requiring only practice and the will to do it....


----------

