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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oerg
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread 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.
  • #51
Wow, it looks like this thread isn't dying any time soon.

About unobtanium: It's probably a good thing that the movie avoided mentioning why it's so expensive. Humanizing the enemy is dangerous. If you knew that unobtanium was needed to relieve an ecological disaster that would otherwise kill 2 billion people, would you still sympathize with the NaVi? Even if unobtanium was somewhat less useful--say, if it promised to revolutionize computing--viewers would sympathize with any legitimate human needs.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
ideasrule said:
About unobtanium: It's probably a good thing that the movie avoided mentioning why it's so expensive. Humanizing the enemy is dangerous.

yeah, I think they hint it isn't for humanitarian/benevolent purposes by them introducing the humans as private mercenaries.
 
  • #53
ideasrule said:
Wow, it looks like this thread isn't dying any time soon.

About unobtanium: It's probably a good thing that the movie avoided mentioning why it's so expensive. Humanizing the enemy is dangerous. If you knew that unobtanium was needed to relieve an ecological disaster that would otherwise kill 2 billion people, would you still sympathize with the NaVi? Even if unobtanium was somewhat less useful--say, if it promised to revolutionize computing--viewers would sympathize with any legitimate human needs.

Who the viewers sympathize with is of no significance. The viewers do not affect the direction of the movie, they are simply passive observers. That being said a romance between the humanoid and the native girl is always more exciting than excavators. No matter how touching the human story could be presented, in comparison with love angle in the movie, the humans are just pests who overbred in their own right and deserve no retribution. You could push this idea so far as to say that this is the last of humanity and they came in search of water, and it still wouldn't make the viewers emphathize with humans
 
  • #54
Greg Bernhardt said:
omg i loved that movie, and you are so right. it seems others are picking up on it. check this out!

Too funny!
From Bill Kroyer..

The Director of..

..Not much else, really.

I think I want to see Fern Gully more than I want to see Avatar.
 
  • #55
About unobtanium: It's probably a good thing that the movie avoided mentioning why it's so expensive. Humanizing the enemy is dangerous. If you knew that unobtanium was needed to relieve an ecological disaster that would otherwise kill 2 billion people, would you still sympathize with the NaVi? Even if unobtanium was somewhat less useful--say, if it promised to revolutionize computing--viewers would sympathize with any legitimate human needs.

A fact like this may make us sympathesize with the NaVi less (btw,NaVi? stolen from Legend of Zelda?) but it would lead to a more nuanced film. A film that is maybe less black and white, but more truthful. Either way, I doubt that's what they were mining it for.

Personally I thought it was boring. Yeah the effects were great, but they mean nothing if they're not backed up by a good plot, not a recycled one. Think about it like this, if Avatar were a book, would you read it? Most likely James Cameron would be sued for plagiarism.
 
  • #56
LBloom said:
Think about it like this, if Avatar were a book, would you read it?
I like this. A litmus test for a good story.
 
  • #57
ideasrule said:
About unobtanium: It's probably a good thing that the movie avoided mentioning why it's so expensive.
One of the big weaknesses of the movie, and one sign of a poorly-written story.

Unobtainium is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacGuffin" . (I would say "nothing more than a MacGuffin", but that is redundant).



cronxeh said:
Who the viewers sympathize with is of no significance. The viewers do not affect the direction of the movie, they are simply passive observers.
What a strange thing to say. It is the experience of the viewers that is the goal of the film. If the viewers got the wrong message (by, say empathizing with the humans) the movie has failed.

ideasrule said:
You could push this idea so far as to say that this is the last of humanity and they came in search of water, and it still wouldn't make the viewers emphathize with humans
I disagree. When you start ... uh ... humanizing the enemy :-p you can' help but generate sympathy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #58
My boy brought up an interesting plot cheat.

They went into the Fluxomatic Vortexification Zone specifically because it scrambled the navigation and targeting signals. But apparently nothng else, like the Avatar link, or the communications links.

Another weak plot hack: the bad-guy-technology-neutralizer-bubble. (At least in STII:TWoK, the Mutara Nebula neutralized good AND bad guys equally).
 
  • #59
Well, we only lasted an hour, but the 3D was impressive. It was worth a look.

I just can't get into the animated movies yet. They still have a little ways to go before they will be convincing enough for me to forget its animation. To me it is still like watching a cartoon.
 
Last edited:
  • #60
BobG said:
One noticeable glitch in the biology of the Na'vi. The tails are just kind of stuck on like a cartoon character. No real tail would project out at a right angle like that since tails are an extension of the spinal cord.
I've a tail that sticks out at a right angle that isn't part of my spinal cord.
How do the Na'vi reproduce?
See above.

ps. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't know what you are talking about.
 
  • #61
DaveC426913 said:
My boy brought up an interesting plot cheat.

They went into the Fluxomatic Vortexification Zone specifically because it scrambled the navigation and targeting signals. But apparently nothng else, like the Avatar link, or the communications links.

Another weak plot hack: the bad-guy-technology-neutralizer-bubble. (At least in STII:TWoK, the Mutara Nebula neutralized good AND bad guys equally).

I would assume the Avatar link is in RF range, and the flux is magnetic. That being said its possible the flux generates frequencies in the radar jamming range (1ghz-50ghz), while the Avatar link can be low frequency or high frequency and still unaffected by the flux.

A skeptic without a working knowledge of a subject matter is a fool :)
 
  • #62
Yeah the effects were great, but they mean nothing if they're not backed up by a good plot, not a recycled one.
It's a different version of a good plot.

I don't understand why the plot being done before takes away from how good the movie is.
The enjoyability of the movie is dependent on if you've seen the plot done before? That would mean people who haven't seen the plot done before would think it was great. So in other words, some people will like the movie and some people won't, just like every other movie.
 
  • #63
leroyjenkens said:
I don't understand why the plot being done before takes away from how good the movie is.

Do you read the same book over and over but maybe replace some names? People like fresh content, fresh ideas and twists. If you know what is going to happen, it's not as thrilling.
 
  • #64
cronxeh said:
I would assume the Avatar link is in RF range, and the flux is magnetic. That being said its possible the flux generates frequencies in the radar jamming range (1ghz-50ghz), while the Avatar link can be low frequency or high frequency and still unaffected by the flux.

A skeptic without a working knowledge of a subject matter is a fool :)
We try not to call other PF members fools. And I have a good knowledge of the subject matter, not sure why you think I wouldn't.

The obvious answer is that they are in different ranges. It's just too convenient. As you point out, it's not as simple as RF vs. magnetic; it's at least Rf versus radar, or whatever other EM freq the missile tracking systems use.
 
  • #65
DaveC426913 said:
We try not to call other PF members fools. And I have a good knowledge of the subject matter, not sure why you think I wouldn't.

The obvious answer is that they are in different ranges. It's just too convenient. As you point out, it's not as simple as RF vs. magnetic; it's :biggrin:at least Rf versus radar, or whatever other EM freq the missile tracking systems use.

Obviously since you have a working knowledge, as well as the PF community, the comment wasn't aimed at you :biggrin:

I just think this movie is very plausible in every way and people saying negative comments are ruining the fantasy world!

Also, if you notice in the movie the 'suit' team had a working portable radar, or infrared, so the upper Ghz range is not affected by flux, and by symmetry I would assume the lower (1-900 Mhz) wasn't affected either - illogical, but nonetheless plausible
 
  • #66
Do you read the same book over and over but maybe replace some names? People like fresh content, fresh ideas and twists. If you know what is going to happen, it's not as thrilling.
You don't know what's going to happen until you read it. Just because a book so far has resembled something else you've read, doesn't mean the rest of the book will. And two movies having the same premise doesn't mean they're carbon copies. The premise of Independence Day is the same as War of the Worlds. Do you automatically know all the details of both just from seeing one?
 
  • #67
leroyjenkens said:
You don't know what's going to happen until you read it. Just because a book so far has resembled something else you've read, doesn't mean the rest of the book will. And two movies having the same premise doesn't mean they're carbon copies.

Look, I liked the movie, but 15min in and I had the movie mapped in my head and it all came true.
 
  • #68
My daughter wants to see this one, so we'll probably go see it soon.

I've heard there's a lot of symbolism woven into the story. That's always a plus for me. Even better are layers - tell me a story about one thing but have hidden meaning throughout. Any symbolism? layering?
 
  • #69
Speaking of symbolism.. The Na'vi only have 4 fingers, no ring finger. Perhaps they don't need rings to show their fidelity, and they mate for life compared to humans.
 
  • #70
Look, I liked the movie, but 15min in and I had the movie mapped in my head and it all came true.
You can guess what's going to happen in any movie. I guessed what the twist ending for The Village would be, and I just happened to be correct. I hadn't seen any movies similar to The Village before, I just thought based on the director's proclivity towards twist endings, I thought that would be a likely scenario.

I had Avatar mapped in my head before I even saw the movie, just based on what I saw in the trailer. I thought of what would be the likely scenario and it just happened to be correct. It could have went a totally opposite way, but it didn't.

After years of watching movies, we all have an idea of how movies will go. We know it's almost guaranteed that it has to be a happy ending and based on what we knew of the storyline, even before we saw the movie (you could get the story from the trailer), we know there's not that many options for how that plot could end happily and fittingly.
I even predicted that he would change bodies at the end and the very last scene before the credits would be him in the other body opening his eyes. I just happened to be correct, but it's a fitting ending, so I'm happy with it. Just because I predicted it, doesn't take anything away from it.
I've heard there's a lot of symbolism woven into the story. That's always a plus for me. Even better are layers - tell me a story about one thing but have hidden meaning throughout. Any symbolism? layering?
That depends on the viewer. Some people may see this and think it represents that, or see something else and say there's a hidden meaning. The director may have made it completely straightforward, so you'd have to find out from him if you're basing it on the director's intentions.
 
Last edited:
  • #71
leroyjenkens said:
You can guess what's going to happen in any movie. I guessed what the twist ending for The Village would be, and I just happened to be correct.
Really bad example.

I try very hard to live in-the-moment when watching movies; I hate guessing them (and I dislike people who do), and yet I could not help but see the obvious ending of this movie a mile away. The movie suffered greatly from being based on a twist ending.

leroyjenkens said:
That depends on the viewer. Some people may see this and think it represents that, or see something else and say there's a hidden meaning. The director may have made it completely straightforward, so you'd have to find out from him if you're basing it on the director's intentions.
That's pretty hard to swallow. Either they put symbolism in or they didn't. It would be awfully hard to accidentally see symbolism woven into a movie where there was none. It would be like the static on a TV screen coincidentally forming an image of a choo-choo.
 
Last edited:
  • #72
DaveC426913 said:
That's pretty hard to swallow. Either they put symbolism in or they didn't. It would be awfully hard to accidentally see symbolism woven into a movie where there was none. It would be like the static on a TV screen coincidentally forming an image of a choo-choo.

Doesn't probability theory say that at some point, if you let the static go for long enough, it will?
 
  • #73
Char. Limit said:
Doesn't probability theory say that at some point, if you let the static go for long enough, it will?
OK, the movie was long, but not that long... :wink:
 
  • #74
  • #75
Ideas...

I'm not sure I'm a reliable source.

The other guy probably is, though.
 
  • #76
Dark Side of the Rainbow[1] (also known as Dark Side of Oz or The Wizard of Floyd) refers to the pairing of the 1973 Pink Floyd music album The Dark Side of the Moon with the visual portion of the 1939 film The Wizard of Oz.[2] This produces moments where the film and the album appear to correspond with each other. The title of the music video-like experience comes from a combination of the album title and the film's song "Over the Rainbow". Band members and others involved in the making of the album state that any relationship between the two works of art is merely a coincidence.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Side_of_the_Rainbow

Try watching TWOO with DSOTM playing [properly timed]. The apparent correlations are quite amazing at times.

Seeing imaginary symbolism is no more unusual than seeing recognizable forms in cloud formations.
 
Last edited:
  • #77
Also, I have to say that after one hour, I had seen nothing close to great writing in Avatar. I can see why the movie has broad appeal, but really, beyond the cgi, this is not a cinematic masterpiece.
 
  • #78
I think Avatar and Saving Private Ryan share some similarities, both have great directing and simple stories, but unfortunately, Avatar's story was a bit of a cliche and therefore too predictable. How hard is it to have an unpredictable plot? It definitely would have improved the movie by a ton. But the movie was still really good for me though.
 
  • #79
Oerg said:
I think Avatar and Saving Private Ryan share some similarities, both have great directing and simple stories, but unfortunately, Avatar's story was a bit of a cliche and therefore too predictable. How hard is it to have an unpredictable plot? It definitely would have improved the movie by a ton. But the movie was still really good for me though.

OK I'll bite. How would you have changed the plot if given an opportunity?
 
  • #80
cronxeh said:
OK I'll bite. How would you have changed the plot if given an opportunity?

Don't know, I'm not much of a story teller. It was the same with The Lord of The Rings for me, I really enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring, but once I read the book, the second and third parts of the trilogy didn't achieve the same effect that the Fellowship did for me.
 
  • #81
Really bad example.

I try very hard to live in-the-moment when watching movies; I hate guessing them (and I dislike people who do), and yet I could not help but see the obvious ending of this movie a mile away. The movie suffered greatly from being based on a twist ending.
Like I said, since you know the director is going to give it a twist ending, there's not many other twist endings it could have.
And no matter how much you thought the movie would end that way, you didn't KNOW it. It was still a guess. Plus, there were two twist endings. One involving the monster and the one that involves the era they're living in.
I was giving an example of a movie that I guessed the ending and happened to be correct. I don't know how that's a really bad example, since it fits just fine. But apparently it's the worst example ever contrived by mankind. Sorry.
That's pretty hard to swallow. Either they put symbolism in or they didn't. It would be awfully hard to accidentally see symbolism woven into a movie where there was none. It would be like the static on a TV screen coincidentally forming an image of a choo-choo.
So you're saying no one can see a scene and interpret it as a symbol unless it really was a symbol intended by the director?
Don't know, I'm not much of a story teller. It was the same with The Lord of The Rings for me, I really enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring, but once I read the book, the second and third parts of the trilogy didn't achieve the same effect that the Fellowship did for me.
Lord of the Rings is limited in unpredictability because it has to follow the story of the books.

But for people who haven't read the books, there is still the unpredictability. Too bad the trailers ruined that, though. At the end of the first movie, you think Gandalf is dead, but in the trailer for the second movie, they show him alive.
 
  • #82
leroyjenkens said:
Like I said, since you know the director is going to give it a twist ending, there's not many other twist endings it could have.
And no matter how much you thought the movie would end that way, you didn't KNOW it. It was still a guess. Plus, there were two twist endings. One involving the monster and the one that involves the era they're living in.
I was giving an example of a movie that I guessed the ending and happened to be correct. I don't know how that's a really bad example, since it fits just fine. But apparently it's the worst example ever contrived by mankind. Sorry.
Well I just meant a bad example because the twist was so clumsily done. There are better movies where the ending was predictable but not because it was so poorly handled.

leroyjenkens said:
So you're saying no one can see a scene and interpret it as a symbol unless it really was a symbol intended by the director?
Not anymore. I conceded your point after reading the other thread on Avatar.

leroyjenkens said:
Lord of the Rings is limited in unpredictability because it has to follow the story of the books.
More to the point (and more to the earlier poster), LotR is limited in predictability because it is an epic story i.e. the story (at least the ending) is already known. Titanic is another epic.
 
  • #83
We went to the 3D showing last night. We both agreed that it was one of the best movie theater experiences we've had in quite some time.

As Greg said, the plot wasn't unique in any way; however, we were amazed by the creativity expressed in the wildlife and plantlife. My favorites were the little "lizards" who flew about by means of glowing propeller wings, and the "panther" in the chase scene at the beginning of the movie.
 
  • #84
Dembadon said:
We went to the 3D showing last night. We both agreed that it was one of the best movie theater experiences we've had in quite some time.

As Greg said, the plot wasn't unique in any way; however, we were amazed by the creativity expressed in the wildlife and plantlife. My favorites were the little "lizards" who flew about by means of glowing propeller wings, and the "panther" in the chase scene at the beginning of the movie.

I'm sorry, but did you like the cougar in the movie? I am of course referring to Sigourney Weaver
 
  • #85
cronxeh said:
Dembadon said:
We went to the 3D showing last night. We both agreed that it was one of the best movie theater experiences we've had in quite some time.

As Greg said, the plot wasn't unique in any way; however, we were amazed by the creativity expressed in the wildlife and plantlife. My favorites were the little "lizards" who flew about by means of glowing propeller wings, and the "panther" in the chase scene at the beginning of the movie.
I'm sorry, but did you like the cougar in the movie? I am of course referring to Sigourney Weaver

I think she was an excellent choice for her part. She's a great actress and did very well at making her character believable, as usual.
 
  • #86
DaveC426913 said:
More to the point (and more to the earlier poster), LotR is limited in predictability because it is an epic story i.e. the story (at least the ending) is already known. Titanic is another epic.

oh well, maybe predictability is more of an issue for me than others. For someone who has never read the book before the first part of the movie trilogy, the Fellowship's story certainly was unpredictable. I didn't like Titanic too much too.
 
  • #87
I thought this movie was rather silly, unobtainium and all that.

The orange dragon was cool, though.
 
  • #88
Well I just meant a bad example because the twist was so clumsily done. There are better movies where the ending was predictable but not because it was so poorly handled.
The point I was making with the village example was that you can guess what's going to happen in any movie, regardless if the plot hasn't been done before. Where it ranks on the hierarchy of predictable movies is beside the point.
 
  • #89
arildno said:
I thought this movie was rather silly, unobtainium and all that.

Yeah, I cringed a bit on that one. :biggrin:
 
  • #90
I was thinking I would see this, but now I'm really unsure. Plot is usually important to me. I actually thought the LOTR movies were lousy because I found the plot in them rather lousy.
 
  • #91
Nebula815 said:
I actually thought the LOTR movies were lousy because I found the plot in them rather lousy.
In all my years, I never thought that - if someone were going to have a beef with LotR - it would be about the plot.

LotR is nothing but plot. All 1200 pages of it.
 
  • #92
DaveC426913 said:
In all my years, I never thought that - if someone were going to have a beef with LotR - it would be about the plot.

LotR is nothing but plot. All 1200 pages of it.

What plot you referring to? Bunch of hobbits get together and go to a volcano to drop a ring in the lake? Yea that's real original and trippy :biggrin:
 
  • #93
cronxeh said:
What plot you referring to? Bunch of hobbits get together and go to a volcano to drop a ring in the lake? Yea that's real original and trippy :biggrin:
Plot is all about complication, misdirection, motivation of characters, etc. If you want a move that consists of "A wants to kill B" and "A kills B" you won't sell too many tickets. I'll bet that LOTR has sold millions of DVD sets even amongst people like myself that read the whole series 40 years ago.
 
  • #94
Too many of the same stereotypical character archetypes all to recognizable in American Cinema: Evil souless marines, greedy capitalist, the one marine who adopts the culture of the natives and realizes his culture contains elements of 'savagery' , noble natives who are able to peacefully coexist with all the wildlife , and pure and virtuous scientists who are the only group outside the culture of the natives that understands and respects the culture of the natives and henders all of the marines and businessmen's attempts to destroy there culture for selfish gains. The world is not that black and white.
 
Last edited:
  • #95
This is the type of fantasy world we all dream about. Oh man, I wish I was on that planet.

I'm right there with you.
 
  • #96
DaveC426913 said:
That's pretty hard to swallow. Either they put symbolism in or they didn't. It would be awfully hard to accidentally see symbolism woven into a movie where there was none. It would be like the static on a TV screen coincidentally forming an image of a choo-choo.

I don't know about yours, but my static forms a choo-choo ::grin::
 
  • #97
I liked it but was also irritated by the use of the fashionable corporate/military bad guys.
 
  • #98
I liked the movie.
 
  • #99
watched it again on imax 3d and enjoyed it even more than the first time
 
  • #100
noblegas said:
... The world is not that black and white.

I believe that's why it's considered a science-fiction / fantasy film. :wink:
 

Similar threads

Why is Avatar the Number 1 Movie of the Century?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Filmmakers lost in the world of 3D animation and special effects
2
Replies
58
Views
7K
It's remarkable how big of an impact professors can have
Replies
3
Views
4K
What interesting videos did you watch today?
Replies
30
Views
4K
Intermediate Axis Theorem.... fun to learn it again with You Tube
Replies
3
Views
964
Do you think we should attempt contact with aliens?
Replies
9
Views
2K
Car Crash Analysis: Analyzing Friction & Speed
Replies
9
Views
4K
Do You Ever Have That Feeling That Someone Is Watching You
Replies
12
Views
2K
Home Repair & Maintenance Advice for Newbie?
Replies
11
Views
3K
What's the best major between Physics & Chemistry for entering MS in Nuclear Engineering?
Replies
12
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top