I guess James Cameron is a genius

[Colin Droidmilk]

True enough. By the same token, in the case of Avatar, it wouldn’t be the first time the overwhelming majority of critics, fans, and audiences knew something a few disgruntled fanboys didn’t.

For the record I have nothing but respect for those who didn't dig Avatar, especially when they articulate their criticisms logically, intelligently, and dispassionately. My issue is with the condescending insinuation that those of us who were blown away by the film represent some sort of lowest common denominator with regard to our taste and intellect.



Gotcha. In my day we called it “unmotivated camera movement.”

It bugged me in LOTR as well because in many instances I couldn’t tell who’s POV those jarringly sweeping moves were intended to convey. More often than not they took me out of the picture. With Avatar that’s not an issue.



The dialogue in Avatar is on a par with Aliens; no better, no worse. James Cameron has never been a brilliant wordsmith, but judging his films solely on that basis seems a bit narrow-minded to my way of thinking (not that you’ve done so).

I mean, if I were to have pre-judged Star Wars based strictly on the merit of lines like “Stay on target, stay on target,” or “She’ll die before she tells you anything!,” or “Boy, it’s lucky you had these compartments!” I’d never had made it into the theater.

Glad to see I might be mistaken in my perception of what I really did see as unmotivated camera movement on the landscape POVs. (Glad because I might actually go and see it for the copter things in 3D). But on this landscape shot issue, one thing that bugged me in one of the clips was this ubiquitous fast-rising crane shot over a cg scene, which we see everywhere nowadays. We had it in Gladiator on the CG Colliseum. It was phony in that film and remains phoney-looking ( to me) in the Av clip. Difficult to say why exactly, but I really hope directors know the difference between what they've done in a CG shot like that and Sergio Leone's rising crane shot over the rail station in 'Once upon a Time in the West', or the opening crane shot in 'Touch of Evil'. And I sure hope to high heaven they don't imagine their CG shots have trumped such real-camera work.

The dialogue you picked from Star Wars were the few niggly bits all lumped together, avoiding all the dialogue gold in that film, such as every single line between Leia, Han and Luke in the Death Star. I didn't watch some weird Avatar trailer which had somehow contrived to lump together cherry-picked worst moments of Avatar dialogue, I watched entire scenes and encountered nothing but a poor man's Aliens or weak-tea retreads of Starship Troopers.

The blue girl that says, 'Run... definitely run'. Was she a native or a human in an avatar?

 

[AnubisGuard]

^Human in an avatar. That was Sigourney Weaver's character (forget her name – how's that for impact?), the lead scientist and general guide to Pandora for much of the film.

 

[Studio Stasis]

The blue girl that says, 'Run... definitely run'. Was she a native or a human in an avatar?

Were you being serious when you asked this? I can't tell in text.

That was Dr. Grace Augustine - Sigourney Weaver

I thought they made that obvious all through the film. Maybe you're making a joke that went over my head. I dunno. :confused

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

Were you being serious when you asked this? I can't tell in text.

That was Dr. Grace Augustine - Sigourney Weaver

I thought they made that obvious all through the film. Maybe you're making a joke that went over my head. I dunno. :confused

Yes, I was serious, because I'm the freak that dares to criticise while having seen only several scenes online as opposed to the whole film. Re the line - I'm tired of those type of Ian Malcolm rip-off lines, but at least Cameron didn't put it in the mouth of a native. Thanks.

 

[CTF]

Well, I guess there's a lot of different shot types in that, incl. possible switches to cg environments for the swooping shots on the troll, I don't know.

There are no swooping shots in that scene, it is definitely handheld. I'm pretty sure that was one of the first times a virtual camera was used, actually. And in regards to the environments, most of those are minis. Shot by one of the best shooters in the business, no less!

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

There are no swooping shots in that scene, it is definitely handheld. I'm pretty sure that was one of the first times a virtual camera was used, actually. And in regards to the environments, most of those are minis. Shot by one of the best shooters in the business, no less!

My memory lapses, sorry. Still, it was a virtual camera, and I do remember grimacing through a lot of the CG motion in the scene...

 

[Solo4114]

Even though we may disagree on this movie (You and I generally agree on movies, I've noticed.) I completely agree with you on people's reaction to it. It's been very disappointing.

I've been doing some thinking abotu the reaction/backlash thing, and I think a lot of it has to do with marketing and pre-viewing hype for people. Films that get trumpeted as "game changers" or the second coming are, I think, more prone to that kind of "OMG, that SUCKED" response, rather than something like, say, a Michael Bay movie, which everyone KNOWS will "suck", but are watching mostly for the 'splosions rather than the compelling characters.

We've also, as a culture, been fed a steady diet of dumb action flicks in recent years, so that when one comes along with a shred of anything more, the hype machine goes into overdrive and proclaims it an epic revolutionary mythical magical game changer that may very well cure cancer and the common cold. When it fails to live up to these lofty claims, people respond with vehemence that, to my way of thinking, mirrors the hyperbole of the hype.

A friend of mine has been RANTING about this film and how incredibly stupid it is, how awful it is, how much it SUCKSZOMG!!!!11!!! He also froths at the mouth about how could people like such crap and so on and so forth. I think his reaction is a combination of factors.


First, the pre-release hype created certain expectations for him, and I guess he views them with a less jaundiced eye than I do. Most of the time I see that kind of hype, I think "No way can it be accurate." Because most of the time it isn't. I guess he's still prone to it, or still prone to really WANTING to like a given film, rather than approaching it neutrally.

Second, and this gets a bit more subtle, I think there's kind of a reaction to feeling like an outcast that comes into play. When EVERYONE is saying how over-the-moon they are about this or that thing, but you disliked it, that means you're the outcast. Most people don't REALLY enjoy being an outcast or feeling like they aren't part of the crew, in on the joke, etc. We're social animals after all, and if you're on the outside of the monkey troupe, well, that's an inherently insecure place to be. I mean, tigers could get you. I honestly think that it's this deep-rooted sense of "OMG, I'm not part of the pack" that causes people to respond as vehemently as they do (at least partially).


Note: I'm not criticizing anyone who dislikes the film or thinks it's really stupid. I'm simply pointing out that the degree of ranting that we engage in (and I'm guilty of this, myself), ESPECIALLY when we come to boards like this and say "Was it just me or did that SUCK?!" and such, we're looking to find other folks who agree with us. ask yourself some time why that is, and ask yourself why it is that instead of simply saying "Wow. That was pretty lame" you see folks actually ranting about how godawful this or that extremely popular bit of pop culture was. Not a criticism, here, just an observation that I find interesting. And, as I said, I've done this myself.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Well. Hype is bad. We all know it, 'cause it usually always sets the bar way too high and higher than something can actually deliver... so we feel cheated, when we are not finding that comfort zone that we were promised. A shame really, because hype kills enjoyment of something. At least in my view it does.

To me, it's not the best movie ever, it's not the worst movie ever... to me it's just an enjoyable movie that I felt was worth for me to see - not only the all too familiar story of love and allegiance and to make tough calls that we have all seen before, but also the fantastic visuals that we perhaps have seen some glimpse of in other films, but where it fell flat because the story wasn't there to support it.

What I got out of the movie was a great experience. It was my first time checking out the new type 3D effects, so that was awesome to see, as I had horror visions of the old style version with the paper glasses with the red and blue tinted plastic... and to go from that into a totally believable 3D environment, where it didn't feel like the director had to throw things at you all the time, so you'd really know it was 3d, but just basically ignored the 3D technology, ignoring that we were dealing with CGI environments and characters, and just let the scenes and characters play out the action. That was what I got out of it. I felt entertained. I felt I wanted to know more. I didn't feel cheated, like I did when watching Transformers, Wolverine and some of these other movies where the director is just constantly screaming at you: *look at all my CGI creatures and action... isn't it great, well, isn't it... look at all the money I spent. You gotta love it, please love it, look... it's circling the intricate CGI creation you can barely even make out... neat, huh!?*

If you like it, cool. If you don't like it, cool. Shoot the hype... have some fun... and remember... ****... just have fun.

 

[CTF]

"I still believe!"

 

[CTF]

My memory lapses, sorry. Still, it was a virtual camera, and I do remember grimacing through a lot of the CG motion in the scene...

Are you referring to the animation of the troll? Otherwise, you've lost me... I think you should give that scene a watch.

 

[CTF]

Avatar has succeeded for critics, Avatar has succeeded for audiences, and more importantly for the FX team that worked on the film.

Star Trek has succeeded for critics, Star Trek has succeeded for audiences, and more importantly for the FX team that worked on the film.

:angel

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

I've been doing some thinking abotu the reaction/backlash thing, and I think a lot of it has to do with marketing and pre-viewing hype for people. Films that get trumpeted as "game changers" or the second coming are, I think, more prone to that kind of "OMG, that SUCKED" response, rather than something like, say, a Michael Bay movie, which everyone KNOWS will "suck", but are watching mostly for the 'splosions rather than the compelling characters.

We've also, as a culture, been fed a steady diet of dumb action flicks in recent years, so that when one comes along with a shred of anything more, the hype machine goes into overdrive and proclaims it an epic revolutionary mythical magical game changer that may very well cure cancer and the common cold. When it fails to live up to these lofty claims, people respond with vehemence that, to my way of thinking, mirrors the hyperbole of the hype.

A friend of mine has been RANTING about this film and how incredibly stupid it is, how awful it is, how much it SUCKSZOMG!!!!11!!! He also froths at the mouth about how could people like such crap and so on and so forth. I think his reaction is a combination of factors.


First, the pre-release hype created certain expectations for him, and I guess he views them with a less jaundiced eye than I do. Most of the time I see that kind of hype, I think "No way can it be accurate." Because most of the time it isn't. I guess he's still prone to it, or still prone to really WANTING to like a given film, rather than approaching it neutrally.

Second, and this gets a bit more subtle, I think there's kind of a reaction to feeling like an outcast that comes into play. When EVERYONE is saying how over-the-moon they are about this or that thing, but you disliked it, that means you're the outcast. Most people don't REALLY enjoy being an outcast or feeling like they aren't part of the crew, in on the joke, etc. We're social animals after all, and if you're on the outside of the monkey troupe, well, that's an inherently insecure place to be. I mean, tigers could get you. I honestly think that it's this deep-rooted sense of "OMG, I'm not part of the pack" that causes people to respond as vehemently as they do (at least partially).


Note: I'm not criticizing anyone who dislikes the film or thinks it's really stupid. I'm simply pointing out that the degree of ranting that we engage in (and I'm guilty of this, myself), ESPECIALLY when we come to boards like this and say "Was it just me or did that SUCK?!" and such, we're looking to find other folks who agree with us. ask yourself some time why that is, and ask yourself why it is that instead of simply saying "Wow. That was pretty lame" you see folks actually ranting about how godawful this or that extremely popular bit of pop culture was. Not a criticism, here, just an observation that I find interesting. And, as I said, I've done this myself.

I agree, in the main.

And now I'm curious to see an analysis of why the monkey troupe tends to rip to pieces so vehemently the isolated monkey that doesn't share the tribe view. The tribe counter-attack often contains actual personal abuse, which is quite hilarious, really. And totally phoney, of course, since no one knows each other here... the guys we fight over this or that trivial movie nonsense could be chaps we'd willingly die for if we ever got to know them in person...

Another thing, let me just finish by putting in a positive word for ranting. I love reading a good bellyache, even about stuff that I like. I like rock music, but I love reading Robert Crumb's rants against rock because they're so damn funny. I'm not a smoker but I love Bill Hicks' rants against non-smokers. Ranting is the biz if done well. In fact all it needs is passion and then you get a pretty good rant. A movie isn't a person, it doesn't have rights and if it has offended you by letting you down and stealing your money, then I see no earthly reason why it shouldn't receive a good thrashing at your hands, in public. If a film has angered you, then it's not enough to say, 'Oh, that was pretty lame...' What you really need to do is punch the film in the face.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

I know some like to argue and put someone else in a corner to see if they have a good comeback to burrow their way out of the corner. Like wanting to see if that person has smarts and is worth interacting with... or if he's a whiner.

 

[Soundwave]

A movie isn't a person, it doesn't have rights and if it has offended you by letting you down and stealing your money, then I see no earthly reason why it shouldn't receive a good thrashing at your hands, in public.

You haven't taken the time to even watch Avatar, so it doesn't deserve to recieve a good thrashing from yourself, in public.

I like rock music, but I love reading Robert Crumb's rants against rock because they're so damn funny. I'm not a smoker but I love Bill Hicks' rants against non-smokers.

They all rant at things from dealing/seeing/hearing it in person, so that they can create an informed opinion on the subject at hand.

Ranting is the biz if done well.

Ranting is the biz, but from what I've seen from you in this thread, you haven't done it well.

Go and see Avatar in 3D for yourself. Go in with an open mind, forget what you've read and heard about the film and see for yourself whether it's an enjoyable and entertaining experience. I think you'd be pleasently suprised.

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

You haven't taken the time to even watch Avatar, so it doesn't deserve to recieve a good thrashing from yourself, in public.


They all rant at things from dealing/seeing/hearing it in person, so that they can create an informed opinion on the subject at hand.


Go and see Avatar in 3D for yourself. Go in with an open mind, forget what you've read and heard about the film and see for yourself whether it's an enjoyable and entertaining experience. I think you'd be pleasently suprised.

I agree I have no right to thrash Avatar as an entire movie experience (I was talking generally about film-bashing). And I never did. I do stand guilty in the first post of expressing a prediction - based on watching several long-playing scenes - that the film would be a 'mess', but withdrew that very early on.

Everything else I've posted has simply been in defence of a decision, based on a deep aversion to extensive clips, not to see the film. That is, for your information, a decision based on stuff that I've experienced first hand. And I restricted myself to these points - the visual style and the dialogue as evinced in those scenes. Despite the common belief, clips tell you a great deal about a film's ability to suit your taste. Nevertheless, I actually explicitly left open the possibility that the film taken as a whole may even be good.


I don't need to forget what I heard or read about the film; I need to forget all the unappealing things I saw in those scenes. I approached the clips with an open mind, and was sorely disappointed. Then I posted the reasons for my disappointment, and would have been outa here, but for the fact that I was then invited - sometimes politely, sometimes rudely - over and over to justify myself (including my unwillingness to risk dough on a film which just honestly doesn't look like my cup of tea - who does that anyway?) and this is what led to my heavy presence in the thread. Not an uncontainable urge to rant.

 

[Solo4114]

...including my unwillingness to risk dough on a film which just honestly doesn't look like my cup of tea - who does that anyway?

Lots of people, apparently. Lots of people also willingly delude themselves into believing that the film might turn out great, in spite of their misgivings....only to discover that they were right the first time.

 

[Carson Dyle]

Star Trek has succeeded for critics, Star Trek has succeeded for audiences, and more importantly for the FX team that worked on the film.

Don't forget the Writers Guild, which recently nominated the film for Best Adapted Screenplay (because, you know, highly competitive writers just love bestowing praise on the shoddy work of their hugely successful peers).

Guess we can add professional writers to the long list of folks lacking in taste and judgment.

 

[Carson Dyle]

the guys we fight over this or that trivial movie nonsense could be chaps we'd willingly die for if we ever got to know them in person...

Speak for yourself, mate.



But, seriously, you've touched upon a frequently overlooked fact about forums like this, i.e. genre fans like us have a lot in common in terms of our fondness for, and interest in, sci-fi/ fantasy/ horror films. For this reason I generally try to keep things civil (the occasional drip of sarcasm notwithstanding), and for the most part I find my fellow RPFers do likewise.

That's not to say I don't enjoy a spirited debate, but I usually find it possible to disagree about a movie -- strongly disagree, in some cases -- without resorting to insults or personal attacks.

 

[CTF]

There are no swooping shots in that scene, it is definitely handheld. I'm pretty sure that was one of the first times a virtual camera was used, actually. And in regards to the environments, most of those are minis. Shot by one of the best shooters in the business, no less!

I was browsing an old copy of Cinefex, when I read something that made me remember this thread.

Cinefex: We used to hear the expression "happy accident" all the time, but in CG, there are no happy accidents, because everything can be so perfectly controlled.

Robert Skotak: And that's what makes it look wrong. A prime example is the shot of the elephant stepping on the car in Jumanji. It was technically brilliant, very well done, but, to me, there was something not quite right about it; and it applies to this idea of perfect nature in CG. In the real world, with real rampaging, out-of-control animals, that elephant wouldn't step on the car so perfectly. It might just step on the trunk, and the car might pop up and block the view of the elephant. A part of the car would fly off, toward the cameraman, and so he'd duck and the camera would suddenly move to the side.

Cinefex: Peter Jackson did that with the cave troll battle in the first Lord of the Rings. It really looked like the cameraman was running around with a handheld camera, trying to get this action while also ducking out of the way of the troll.

Robert Skotak: That's the kind of thing we should be looking for.

 

[Basherthrasher]

I've seen the exact same discussions about other subjects. Once something drifts away from a person's "zone of comfort" it can become the subject of dislike. The more people seem to like it, the more dislike. It's often a polar thing. "I love Star Trek, but Star Wars is stupid/Star Wars rules, and Star Trek sucks."

It's even more infuriating to see the object of dislike being popular and making money and in your face coverage by the media which irks even more because you can't figure out why this stupid worthless thing is so popular, but so obviously undeserving.

Harry Potter, Twilight, Microsoft, Avatar, Apple ... take your pick

This isn't about who's deserving of bashing,or who deserves accolades for what they believe is a good flick! I don't see how Microsoft,or Apple come into play here. There are a lot of underserving people,and movies that recieve awards,and adulation - all the time! What's most disturbing is how easily the general public is accepting of some of the very worst excues for entertainment on the lowest of levels. From so-called "reality shows" to backyard wrestling videos on youtube. What's entertaiment to some,or many is NOT entertainment for all! Then,there are shows,or people who deserve public attention that never recieve it,and never will because what they did wasn't shocking,or popular with the "in crowd"!

Glad to see I might be mistaken in my perception of what I really did see as unmotivated camera movement on the landscape POVs. (Glad because I might actually go and see it for the copter things in 3D). But on this landscape shot issue, one thing that bugged me in one of the clips was this ubiquitous fast-rising crane shot over a cg scene, which we see everywhere nowadays. We had it in Gladiator on the CG Colliseum. It was phony in that film and remains phoney-looking ( to me) in the Av clip. Difficult to say why exactly, but I really hope directors know the difference between what they've done in a CG shot like that and Sergio Leone's rising crane shot over the rail station in 'Once upon a Time in the West', or the opening crane shot in 'Touch of Evil'. And I sure hope to high heaven they don't imagine their CG shots have trumped such real-camera work.

The dialogue you picked from Star Wars were the few niggly bits all lumped together, avoiding all the dialogue gold in that film, such as every single line between Leia, Han and Luke in the Death Star. I didn't watch some weird Avatar trailer which had somehow contrived to lump together cherry-picked worst moments of Avatar dialogue, I watched entire scenes and encountered nothing but a poor man's Aliens or weak-tea retreads of Starship Troopers.

The blue girl that says, 'Run... definitely run'. Was she a native or a human in an avatar?

I'd rather save my money,and build models - something that I know I'll enjoy for the rest of my life without having to pay for the electricity to see it,or put it into a machine to do so! Movies are hollywoods excuse NOT TO WORK! Everyone is suffering right now,and wondering where their next meal is coming from,while looking for work,and wondering if the kids will have food,but hollywood keeps raking in BILLIONS of hard earned bluecollar worker dollars to be "entertained"! Give me a bottle of hand lotion,and an hour of privacy with my girlfriend,or by myself - I'll be "entertained!" This is why our beloved models are being phased out in favour of "digital entertainment". Mindless videogames,and movies that don't make you really think,or think deeply with any spiritual,or personal reflection on life,or make you creative,or think creatively - this is what our world has come to! Who here has had their child,or grandchild ask to build a model with them,or play a board game this week?

A month ago,me and a lifelong friend were talking about the things that made up our youth,and we realised how much better we had it then,as opposed to what todays kids up to their middle twenties are missing. Time were so much slower,and people weren't so rude and in a hellfire hurry to be the first ******* to the red light! "Political Correctness" a horrible misnomer of linguistic butchery - wasn't around to ruin the context of what we really meant to say to each other by removing the context of our languge. Advertising imbeciles trying to make things sound "Cutesy Wootsy" ,or more attractive - just to sell you something you don't really want,or need. Now everyone wants to be nice the earth they destroyed with cigarette smoke,and airconditioning from cars,while shopping a places like "Kohls" where you pay $20.00 for a plain white T-shirt in an AIR CONDITIONED building,then go inside another AIR CONDITIONED building after driving in their AIR CONDITIONED CAR to go shopping for organically grown food complaining how these emissions are destroying the atmosphere!

All this digital crap,and geopolitical clap-trap is entering into our childrens' cartoons,and into movies because it's popular,and popular technology. Televisions were first introduced in the 1940s' but no one made movies glorifying them at that time,but now everyone is blathering on about the latest technology,and trying to introduce it into the dialouge of T.V. shows,and movies. All the jerky,and sometimes see-through digitsed effects that are unconvincing are just a sign of the times no matter how stupid they are! I just wonder once Crap Generated Graphics are no longer the rage,and cell phones are called CELL phones again - not MOBILE phones,as the U.S. is NOT British,and text messaging is a thing of the past,what new idiotic gadget,or misnomers will take their places?

Well. Hype is bad. We all know it, 'cause it usually always sets the bar way too high and higher than something can actually deliver... so we feel cheated, when we are not finding that comfort zone that we were promised. A shame really, because hype kills enjoyment of something. At least in my view it does.



If you like it, cool. If you don't like it, cool. Shoot the hype... have some fun... and remember... ****... just have fun.

Hype is what hollywood,(or as my buddy calls it - hokeywood),does to get you excited about what they want to sell you. Yeah,shoot the hype,and those inciting it!

I know some like to argue and put someone else in a corner to see if they have a good comeback to burrow their way out of the corner. Like wanting to see if that person has smarts and is worth interacting with... or if he's a whiner.

That kind of mentality has ruined this site,and others for the older members. I now see,and understand Boba Debts' disappointment about "the RPF of new". When something you love has changed with the times,or others have come along and changed what you love until it's no longer what it once was,and it has become unrecognisable - you feel a sense of loss. Especially when one of those things is the respect that has seemed to have by the wayside in favour of who has the most snappy remarks,or who is the most popular instigator. This kind of misbehaviour is what kills forums - fast!

Don't forget the Writers Guild, which recently nominated the film for Best Adapted Screenplay (because, you know, highly competitive writers just love bestowing praise on the shoddy work of their hugely successful peers).

Guess we can add professional writers to the long list of folks lacking in taste and judgment.

Look at Dalton Trumbo. He was blacklisted,and still wrote for years under a moniker. Just because someone does something "professionally" - that doesn't make them true professionals! Before you get the urge just to write a retort to my post - this is a subjective issue. How can anyone be a professional judge at what is entertaining to one person,and not another? Everyone is complaining about A.D.D.,and how it may also be not just a mental condition,but also from watching too much T.V. and movies. Most of these people aren't judging because the movie made them think - they're judging it because it's POPULAR at the time they are to decide if this is a good movie,or not! Twelve angry men was brilliant for its' day,and it still is,but it isn't being judged,as it's an old movie that's no longer popular,or new. By the way,it made me think,and everytime I watch it with someone new - it does the same for them too!

Most of the kids of today that are asked what they like about movies,and the same answer comes out of their mouths - "The action"! Especially something that looks cartoonish,and has that video game quality without having adult themes that unfortunately most videogames of today have along with vulgar language that children don't need to hear,much less adults who watch R rated movies or play these games over,and over even in front of their childern because of popularity! I've noticed that people who watch R rated garbage have filthy mouths,and very little respect for other people,and talk about wanting to kill people that pi$$ them off - ALL THE TIME! I have a friend that almost never sees his brother,and this guy we all grew up with watches garbage movies with R rated pornography,and violence all the time,and when he comes over - all he talks about is how he wants to kill his own son,as "He's such a little B*$%ch"! The boys only 18 months old. I'll save all that for another topic,and another day.

Not to get off topic though,be glad this isn't another slasher/porn movie that young teenage boys try to sneak down to a friends' house because his parents are out for the evening. This,and other movies like it will be a thing of the past,and forgotten like "Toy story" which was the first all digitised movie ever! It wasn't super fantastic with all kinds of blow s*#t up action,but it was intended for children - who aren't small adults,and don't think like adults do!

I'm sorry for the long post,but I'm sick of all the hollywood hype!