Have You Watched "Avatar" Yet? It's AMAZING!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oerg
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the film "Avatar," highlighting its impressive 3D effects and visual storytelling, which many found to enhance the immersive experience without overshadowing the narrative. While some participants praised the film as a top contender for best movie of the decade, others criticized its plot as unoriginal and predictable, drawing parallels to earlier films like "Dances with Wolves." The balance between story and special effects was a key point, with some arguing that the visuals alone do not compensate for a lack of depth in the script. There were also discussions about the scientific plausibility of elements within the film, such as the floating mountains and the concept of "unobtainium," with varying opinions on how much explanation is necessary for a science fiction narrative. The film's themes and character development were debated, with some viewers expressing disappointment in the stereotypical portrayals and overt moral messages. Overall, while "Avatar" was recognized for its groundbreaking visual achievements, opinions diverged on its storytelling and originality.
  • #151
Newai said:
I'm thinking this is possible with many, many movie combinations.

What's more in all these movies ..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
Yea, the movie is good.
 
  • #153
Greg Bernhardt said:
Let's be honest! The plot has been done before and the writing was so-so. BUT, the 3d experience was top notch. I think it definitely sets the bar for the next crop of movies.

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet or not, but if not here: (Plot Spoiler)

http://9gag.com/photo/16103_full.jpg

NeoDevin said:
http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/epic-fail-avatar-plot-fail.jpg
[/URL]

Apparently It has been posted nevermind!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #154
You guys don't get it. These stories of guy attacks a village, falls in love with a village girl and decides to stay etc., are not new. This theme has been around for as long as monkeys did each other in the... Point is, James Cameron delivered the message. It was finally delivered in the way that let's you enjoy it. Dances with Wolves? Ew. Pokahontas? Ew. Ferngully? Ew. Troy? The list goes on, but there is a reason we enjoy books and not their adaptations - our imagination filled in the blanks. In this case, Cameron allowed our brain to rest and just enjoy that which most of us imagined of for a long time now. And as of this writing, Avatar grossed in $1331 million. That 1.331 BILLION dollars
 
  • #155
cronxeh said:
You guys don't get it. These stories of guy attacks a village, falls in love with a village girl and decides to stay etc., are not new.

Yes, but we're not talking about general story lines. The similarity between Avatar and Fern Gully is positively spooky.

Or at least, it would be spooky if the timing hadn't been so suspicious. It came to him in a dream?? Within two years of the release of Fern Gully?
 
  • #156
I saw it last night. It was a pretty movie, but kinda boring. If it wasn't for the 3D (which was well done) I would describe it as "lame".
 
  • #157
Here is a blog post with a completely different take on the plot that make more sense than the usual Dances With Wolves analogies.

http://ideas.4brad.com/avatar-isnt-dances-wolves-its-another-plot"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #158
joelupchurch said:
Here is a blog post with a completely different take on the plot that make more sense than the usual Dances With Wolves analogies.

http://ideas.4brad.com/avatar-isnt-dances-wolves-its-another-plot"

Amusing, but merely fanciful. It's not meant to be a serious interpretation.

It's more akin to a ... hm, what would you call it ... fan ret-con? What is it called when fans of a film invent a super-story around the existing story to rationalize loose-ends? There's a theory that Chewbacca and R2D2 are the true leaders of the Rebellion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #159
DaveC426913 said:
Amusing, but merely fanciful. It's not meant to be a serious interpretation.

It's more akin to a ... hm, what would you call it ... fan ret-con? What is it called when fans of a film invent a super-story around the existing story to rationalize loose-ends? There's a theory that Chewbacca and R2D2 are the true leaders of the Rebellion.
I need to hear this one. Sounds very interesting.
 
  • #160
Cronxeh why does how much money the movie grossed matter at all? I do not think this is an indication of how 'good' the movie was... just that a crap load of people went to watch it.
 
  • #161
Sorry! said:
Cronxeh why does how much money the movie grossed matter at all? I do not think this is an indication of how 'good' the movie was... just that a crap load of people went to watch it.

If I may,

The fact that this movie grossed 1.3 buttloads of bucks is at least partially an indication of its quality. I do not think anyone is under the illusion that the story was great, but the production was masterful. It really was. Anyone can entertain fools with a flashy movie, but that might get you through the first $100 million gross. You do not accidentally make a movie that scores that big without having some genuine quality behind it.

I'm not saying that you are required to like it. And folks who did not enjoy it should not employ the notion that those who did are somehow stupid or deluded (not to say anyone here said so).

I do not easily get sucked onto fads. I don't follow trends. I never saw Titanic, and I don't intend to even rent it. But this move, I've seen twice (see above) and I have no qualms about having spent the time or the money.
 
  • #162
Chi Meson said:
If I may,

The fact that this movie grossed 1.3 buttloads of bucks is at least partially an indication of its quality. I do not think anyone is under the illusion that the story was great, but the production was masterful. It really was. Anyone can entertain fools with a flashy movie, but that might get you through the first $100 million gross. You do not accidentally make a movie that scores that big without having some genuine quality behind it.

I disagree. I actually almost fell asleep while watch Avatar, some of the ideas I admit were pretty cool but that was it... the 3D didn't put me in awe, I've seen the effects better pulled of when I went to wonderland and saw spongebob square pants for the 5 minute 3D ride. I think the over-hype of it being 3D and 'oh-so great' definitely killed it when I watched the movie. It being SO damn predictable just killed all that hype. I wasn't thinking about anything during the movie but I knew exactly where it was going and how it was going to get there...
Look at this list:
http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide
Look at the company that Avatar is in, Titanic of course was a very good movie but Dark Knight? Far from. Harry Potter? The movies were horrid relative to the books the last few movies didn't even follow what occurred in the books for the most part.

You say that you can entertain any fools with flashy movies but that would only bring you to the 100$ million mark... what about say revenge of the fallen? 835 million. What about 2012? 764 million and that movie was disgustingly horrible from acting straight to the story. There definitely are many movies that are great that do make a lot of money and they are definitely on that list but just because a movie made a lot of money means NOTHING to me about it's quality.

As well each movie ticket for 3D Imax around here cost like 5$ extra or something to that extent. That's like 1.5 times the regular ticket price to pay to see this thing in 3D, combine that with the hype that surrounded it and people who swear by it going to watch it and paying the extra money twice(so in effect they have paid for 3 regular price tickets) and BAM you got yourself a cool 1.3 billion dollars.

Lol, they should have made 2012 in 3D as well, that way the fools could have paid closer to the 1 billion mark.
 
Last edited:
  • #163
Look at the company that Avatar is in, Titanic of course was a very good movie but Dark Knight? Far from. Harry Potter? The movies were horrid relative to the books the last few movies didn't even follow what occurred in the books for the most part.
Dark Knight and the Harry Potter films have gotten good reviews from critics.
The movies aren't bad just because you don't like them.

People wouldn't see Avatar 2 and 3 times if it was a bad movie. If it was just the 3D that makes people go see it in droves, The Final Destination would have made a billion dollars too.
 
  • #164
Chi Meson said:
I do not think anyone is under the illusion that the story was great, but the production was masterful. ... You do not accidentally make a movie that scores that big without having some genuine quality behind it.
Or some novelty.
Star wars was hardly the most original plot in the world and the least said about the dialog and acting the better - but it was a good movie experience.

Ironically Avatar looks like it won't make $gaziilions if it's banned in the biggest market for it's subversive anti-government political message. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703652104574651764117659286.html
 
  • #165
leroyjenkens said:
People wouldn't see Avatar 2 and 3 times if it was a bad movie.
This is not true.
 
  • #166
mgb_phys said:
Ironically Avatar looks like it won't make $gaziilions if it's banned in the biggest market for it's subversive anti-government political message. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703652104574651764117659286.html

I thought that the Chinese would support it for being anti-colonialist, as they used to--and to some extent, still do--label Western countries as colonial powers exploiting China. Apparently, the human flaw of apophenia is worse than I expected.
 
  • #167
Sorry! said:
Cronxeh why does how much money the movie grossed matter at all? I do not think this is an indication of how 'good' the movie was... just that a crap load of people went to watch it.
Well I guess you'll need to define what makes a movie "good"...recognize that the film industry is an industry and the primary goal of moviemaking is to make money. There is a secondary group of films and film companies interested in art, but even they are constrained by money and in any case, this isn't a film designed to be artistic. It is a movie designed to make money by being a technologically cutting-edge, absorbing theatrical experience.

So by my estimation, by the only real relevant criteria, this is the second best movie of all time, and may soon become the best.

Or, think about it another way: presumably people watch their favorite movie more than other movies. I'd say Star Wars is probably my favorite of all time and it is the only movie that I've purposely seen more than once (though I've found recently I'm getting bored with it...). So if everyone thought the same as me, Star Wars would be the highest grossing movie of all time. The money follows the popularity (obviously).
 
  • #168
DaveC426913 said:
This is not true.

This is not true.
 
  • #169
leroyjenkens said:
This is not true.
Glad you agree. :wink:
 
  • #170
I knew in advance what the general plot was and, like others, saw things coming before they happened. I still enjoyed the movie. After the movie, I wanted to see it again and had an odd feeling of mild depression for a day afterward. Then I found out that I wasn't alone.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/"

What kills me is the picture of the audience. Who brings a large pizza to a movie theater?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #171
Borg said:
I knew in advance what the general plot was and, like others, saw things coming before they happened. I still enjoyed the movie. After the movie, I wanted to see it again and had an odd feeling of mild depression for a day afterward. Then I found out that I wasn't alone.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/"
That's a little spooky. I think that if some people got out into our own wildernesses for a while, they'd find that we do have a lot of "Pandora" here on Earth. And after a few days, maybe a week of some good backcountry hiking, they'll be ready to get back to their coffee makers and Cable TV.

If that is a byproduct of this movie (more people turning to appreciate our natural areas) then it was worth it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #172
Borg said:
I knew in advance what the general plot was and, like others, saw things coming before they happened. I still enjoyed the movie. After the movie, I wanted to see it again and had an odd feeling of mild depression for a day afterward. Then I found out that I wasn't alone.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/"

What kills me is the picture of the audience. Who brings a large pizza to a movie theater?

That's strange. I was happy after the movie because it turned out like I hoped it would. Even the final 5 seconds of the film were exactly the way I thought and hoped it would end. It never crossed my mind that I wish the Earth was like Pandora. Why would I want to live in a jungle like that?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #173
Chi Meson said:
That's a little spooky. I think that if some people got out into our own wildernesses for a while, they'd find that we do have a lot of "Pandora" here on Earth. And after a few days, maybe a week of some good backcountry hiking, they'll be ready to get back to their coffee makers and Cable TV.

If that is a byproduct of this movie (more people turning to appreciate our natural areas) then it was worth it.

I think you've made a good point, Chi.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desolation_Wilderness" was my backyard growing up. My friends and I played in the woods until sunset every day in the spring and summer (too much snow in winter). Whenever I feel like I am getting restless or a feeling of general anxiousness, I try to work in a camping, mtb, backpacking, etc. weekend. The vicarious thrills and experiences one gets through movies, even good ones, will never displace the experience of raw wilderness.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #174
Sorry! said:
I disagree. I actually almost fell asleep while watch Avatar, some of the ideas I admit were pretty cool but that was it... the 3D didn't put me in awe, I've seen the effects better pulled of when I went to wonderland and saw spongebob square pants for the 5 minute 3D ride. I think the over-hype of it being 3D and 'oh-so great' definitely killed it when I watched the movie. It being SO damn predictable just killed all that hype. I wasn't thinking about anything during the movie but I knew exactly where it was going and how it was going to get there...
Look at this list:
http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide
Look at the company that Avatar is in, Titanic of course was a very good movie but Dark Knight? Far from. Harry Potter? The movies were horrid relative to the books the last few movies didn't even follow what occurred in the books for the most part.

You say that you can entertain any fools with flashy movies but that would only bring you to the 100$ million mark... what about say revenge of the fallen? 835 million. What about 2012? 764 million and that movie was disgustingly horrible from acting straight to the story. There definitely are many movies that are great that do make a lot of money and they are definitely on that list but just because a movie made a lot of money means NOTHING to me about it's quality.

As well each movie ticket for 3D Imax around here cost like 5$ extra or something to that extent. That's like 1.5 times the regular ticket price to pay to see this thing in 3D, combine that with the hype that surrounded it and people who swear by it going to watch it and paying the extra money twice(so in effect they have paid for 3 regular price tickets) and BAM you got yourself a cool 1.3 billion dollars.

Lol, they should have made 2012 in 3D as well, that way the fools could have paid closer to the 1 billion mark.

I sincerely hope that you are not calling me a fool, Sorry!

It's understandable, you didn't like it. Fine. You like a good plot and good writing. So do I. I'm not saying Avatar makes one of my favorite of all time movies, because it isn't. In my opinion, it was a fantastic experience in 3D (not IMAX, just regular 3D). I do not think that it would be worth it to even rent the DVD once it comes out because the size and resolution of the digital theater was 80% of the experience.

The only thing I ask is, please do not imply that I did not or should not have enjoyed it. Please to not suggest that I have somehow cowed to pressure or hype or whatever and am following the lemmings or whatever. In fact, Titanic was the movie I could not stand (I left after 1 hour).

David Denby, critic for the New Yorker and one who does not suffer bad movies gladly, opens his review with the line "Avatar is the most beautiful movie I have seen in years." I have to say I agree with that sentiment (Anthony Lane is the New Yorker's more piercing critic; he may have had something else to say).
 
  • #175
Chi Meson said:
That's a little spooky. I think that if some people got out into our own wildernesses for a while, they'd find that we do have a lot of "Pandora" here on Earth. And after a few days, maybe a week of some good backcountry hiking, they'll be ready to get back to their coffee makers and Cable TV.

If that is a byproduct of this movie (more people turning to appreciate our natural areas) then it was worth it.

I don't know what hemisphere you live in but it ain't exactly hiking weather up North. I live in Florida, but even here has been having record cold. Most of the people are coming out of theater into a world that is cold and gray.

I noticed that one of the major quotes in the article was from Sweden. They are only getting 6 hours of daylight this time of year, which is pretty depressing to begin with.
 
  • #176
joelupchurch said:
I don't know what hemisphere you live in but it ain't exactly hiking weather up North.
actually, I kinda like hiking in the snow. Skiing is even better! :smile:

Must be my cold heart. :devil:
 
  • #177
The Vatican newspaper and radio station are criticizing James Cameron's 3-D blockbuster for flirting with the idea that worship of nature can replace religion — a notion the pope has warned against. They call the movie a simplistic and sappy tale, despite its awe-inspiring special effects.
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.ap.org/vatican-says-avatar-no-masterpiece-ap

Does religion surgically remove your imagination? Or just the neurons that love nature?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #178
Q_Goest said:
actually, I kinda like hiking in the snow. Skiing is even better! :smile:

Must be my cold heart. :devil:

Snowshoeing is great fun! It's something I'd recommend to anyone.
 
  • #179
Q_Goest said:
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.ap.org/vatican-says-avatar-no-masterpiece-ap

Does religion surgically remove your imagination? Or just the neurons that love nature?

I think it has been known to remove the entire brain in many cases.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #180
They (the vatican) call the movie a simplistic and sappy tale, despite its awe-inspiring special effects.
Look whose talking!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
58
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K