THANK YOU GAAAAH

I thought I was the only one that after watching, thought "Why is this a big deal again?". I mean, yes, awesome graphics--is that honestly what makes a movie these days? Sheesh.

/rant over

The point of the movie is that it tells an old story. But it's still an important one. By coating the age-old tale in Scifi garb, James is doing humanity a favour. Plus, he and his crew had a great deal of fun sci-fiing it up.

It just doesn't scream out anything special to me, I mean, there's nothing wrong with the story, and it's a story that I do really like, don't think I'm knocking it. It certainly kept me engaged (though I think it was a bit long), and yes the concept was great. But yeah, I just think it's lacking some originality or perhaps some real oomph, not sure. There's something about it that makes it not an extremely good film. It is a great film, though.

<<

>>

I don't know why I try to please everyone.

Did you forget that you got to see Sigourney Weaver nude, amirite?

THANK YOU GAAAAH

 

I thought I was the only one that after watching, thought "Why is this a big deal again?". I mean, yes, awesome graphics--is that honestly what makes a movie these days? Sheesh.

 

/rant over

I agree, but what's wrong with a good flick every once in a while with an averageish story and good graphic effects? Avatar dealt with it extremely well, so I found it a great movie just because of the graphic effects - not like modern movies can't have a good story or anything. Just watch, say, Fight Club. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. Both of which were highly acclaimed and came out in the past decade, and they had great stories. To mention a few.

~ck

Well, I honestly did appreciate how they did turn a overcooked story to make it good...but like Phy said, the oomph was missing, and I didn't really see anything special. Maybe it's because over the years as a writer and having family members that like to pick at a movie to death, I've just become extra picky. It's good entertainment, I guess I just don't like how it's getting all this acclaimed attention when there are other movies that deserve it more.

Even though the plot line was, lets admit--basic, there was a lot that was put into that movie.

First it's the first movie, soon to be trilogy as rumor has it, in ages that challenges trekkies to learn a new language other than Klingon. bortaS bir jablu’DI’reh QaQqu’nay, anyone?

Second, the graphics are ground breaking. No, I'm not one who sees a movie, or a video game for that matter, and says "Wow! That movie was great because it has awesome graphics." Trust me. However, I do look at the work put into it and Avatar ranked high on that criteria. I went and saw both versions, 3D and non-3d, in theaters. I've never been too fond of 3D, but this was the best I've seen...especially with the fog. No one does fake fog right. Now aside from the 3D aspect, you've got to look at all the different plant and animal life. A lot of "science fiction" movies, highlighting the more modern ones, will only put forth an alien animal here and a few alien plants there, but Avatar went ahead and created quite a variety of animals, not to mention a vast amount of plant life. Studying the structure of both I found was incredibly fun. I remember seeing two different trees, each with a different from of lizard-like layering. Even with the banshees, it was compelling to see how many different patterns that they used for the backs.

The other detail that I liked looking out for was the difference between the Avatars and the Na'vi. The Na'vi had four fingers (and toes?), but the Avatars had five fingers and toes. Jumping back to the animals, they as well mostly had four fingers/toes and usually consisted of a hexaped design. To see those move/animated was awesome. The only minor struggle in that animated movement was when the hexaped horses had to trot. (I could go on about this....)

Soundtrack wasn't repetitive either. How many times have you watched a movie and they just used the same soundtrack over and over again. Or worse, a squeal was made and they used all of the exact same tracks for that film, that was on the first one.

Must we also note that Avatar actually attempted the genre of science fiction. Too many movies these days are labeled science fiction when they are really horror, horror-romance, or worse, sci-fi soap operas. A key factor that many "sci fi flicks" are missing is that no one even tries to input a scientific reason as why something happens the way it happens. However with Avatar, for instance, why do the "Hallelujah" or floating mountains, float? Well, because they house the Unobtanium which was noted to have magnetic properties. (i.e. The reason why all the equipment goes wacky when approaching them.) So basically we have these huge pieces of rock floating on the magnetic field of the planet. Personally, I am so glad that someone didn't come out and say, "Because the force willed it."

And that's just the short version. It's hard to tear apart a movie and analyze it just by seeing it twice. (It was 2 hours and 40 minutes long.) Yeah, it's not 100% perfect, but it's one of the best I've seen in a long while. Where as I'm a die hard fan of "great plot," this really wasn't too bad. It beats a lot of the stuff they're feeding us these days.

-Akamu

I didn't think Boy with Striped Pyjamas was actually that highly acclaimed. Certainly wasn't here. That being said, I still want to see it, and I want to read the book as well. But that's not what we're talking about.

I'm going to throw in an analogy that I always apply to music, but it will work kinda well here. It doesn't matter how much effort or money into a production, if it's not amazing, it's not amazing. There are plenty of low budget films that are way better than any of the higher budget stuff. Generally, I do not like action films because they're often over the top to me. Avatar was able to be over the top but still be engaging and have an interesting story. That still being said, it still lacks something truly wonderful that would have made this film perfect and truly deserving of all the hype. That being said, I swear the hype is only focused on the visuals anyway (and to a lesser extent the director), and in that sense it deserves every single bit of it.

I saw it twice and I preferred it in 2D *gasp*

Only reason I saw it twice is because I went with two different people; the second time 'round I stopped paying attention halfway through because it just bored me.

The story was predictable, but it was solid; the world of Pandora was beautiful but it didn't strike me as utterly amazing. Something about a bazillion gigantic fluorescent plants took me out of the world =/

The lack of maturity at some points got me too; in the big climatic fight scene, I didn't get a huge impact of what happened because there was no lasting effect. Generic soldiers disappeared without a trace; no blood or even a look at their bodies after their job of dying was done. The only characters that ever bled (I'm so focused on the blood because it added visual impact; it showed quite physically that these characters were injured or dead) were the mains. Maybe that made us focus on them more and sympathize with them, but it sort of told me that this was a kid's movie as well... Which isn't such a bad thing, except that it suffered for it.

It sort of let me down too; District 9 was a so much better movie.