I guess James Cameron is a genius

ReaverReject said:
But that's exactly my point - I have ZERO problem with your opinion, becuase you earned the creds: you forced yourself to sit through all 2 hours and 42 minutes of it! ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, same here.

I just can't be assed arguing what I think -- well, know :angel -- is wrong with it.

Each to their own.
 
Too Much Garlic said:
I can only say that I sat with my mouth agape throughout the entire movie, as I watched it in 3D. I really had not expectations, I had stayed clear of any threads or talk about the movie, so I didn't hear any hype. I was going to go see a Cameron movie and I had barely seen the trailer, but I was blown away. The story has been told a million times, just like Star Wars is the heroes journey and has been told billions of times - I do NOT thereby say it is anything like Star Wars was or is - but even the worst Cameron film is miles above the prequels, Michael Bay, WC Anderson and all those poor directors that make crappy stories with lots of bling.

When seeing this film - forget the hype, forget all the people saying it's cool and the best thing ever, forget the people saying it sucks donkey balls, forget EVERYBODY and ANYTHING you've heard about this movie and just go see it to be entertained. Hell... if anyone can sit through Transformers, AvP, the prequels, Indy 4 and all that dreg - watchable eye candy, but not good films, they should be able to see this - as in my view, it's ten times better, but not the best movie ever.
Click to expand...

Two things:

1.) It's really REALLY difficult to get away from the hype anymore. That goes for any movie, by the way. Everywhere you go, especially with really popular movies, people talk about 'em. Your friends, people on message boards, the press, whatever. You can't get away from it. You're lucky to have seen it with no prior knowledge of it. I think that's the ideal way to see a film. You get the basic plot/premise, or maybe a recommendation from someone who knows YOUR tastes and is saying "I think YOU'D like it. Not that I liked it and therefore so will you, but rather I think it's YOUR kind of movie," and that's it. That's the ideal film experience, in my view.

2.) The movies you listed (TF1, Prequels, etc.) are NOT watchable eye candy. Chiefly because they are not watchable. ;)
 
ReaverReject said:
You cheated!!! LOL of course it's got painfully one-dimensional dialogue like your example and even the predictable "You're not in Kansas anymore..." But so what? If you go in WANTING to hate it, trust me - you've proven beyond question that there are a million and one reasons to. Or, you could go in with the knowledge that there are a million and one things about it you want to hate, but hey, just maybe it's got some redeeming qualities.

Between you and me, the Red Letter Media review is spot-on hilarious, but it's still not enough to make me condemn this movie as a work of brilliant, albeit highly manipulative art. I would say the same about any Steven Spielberg movie namely ET, Schindler's List, and Saving Ryan's Privates.

But is the movie "BAD"??? HELL, NO! I refuse to believe even you'll come back thinking that. You want my standard of "bad"? Just watch that still-born lovechild between The Matrix and Blade Runner: Surrogates or that awful abortion of a remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still... :sick


R
Click to expand...

Ok, lol...

I guess that with the examples of turd cinema you've cited, and with my dislike of the clips, it was a tough call to feel sure in advance that Av wasn't going to be more of the same... but if I can trust you guys... I might go. I might, no promises, lol... if I can just get my attitude straightened out, as you say, brace myself for the hokeyness, and focus on the good aspects of the spectacle stuff (I do like the helicopter things, be a shame to miss them, I suppose)... so long as he keeps that damn camera still for a couple of seconds here and there, lol...

My worry is that I'm such a miserable CG grouch that I'm gonna be calling cartoon BS on a great many camera moves and figure moves. I mean if it's filled with rushing, diving, scale-reducing POV shots over landscapes in the manner of Isengard from LotR, where the camera is moving in a way that no physical camera could (not even mounted on a helicopter), then I'm not going to have a happy time of it in there, lol... still that giant tree did look kind of fun... maybe, maybe...
 
Last edited:
Rotwang said:
Cameron has played a very subtle game with Avatar. He seems to have grabbed upon a bunch of demographics and given them each something to chew on.

For guys, there is the cool hardware, badass guys, marines and plenty of stuff go boom.

But Avatar is also a chick flick with a strong heroine and a romantic hero who understands her and lots of that touchy feely emotions women can't get enough of.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about Aliens, or T2?

Cameron often does that...
 
Colin, as far as I know, Cameron created the camera moves within the computer created environment. IIRC, I didn't see the regular CGI swirl around an object, for instance. I could be wrong.

PHArchivist said:
Rotwang said:
Cameron has played a very subtle game with Avatar. He seems to have grabbed upon a bunch of demographics and given them each something to chew on.

For guys, there is the cool hardware, badass guys, marines and plenty of stuff go boom.

But Avatar is also a chick flick with a strong heroine and a romantic hero who understands her and lots of that touchy feely emotions women can't get enough of.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about Aliens, or T2?

Cameron often does that...
Click to expand...
Where is that in T2? Don't you mean T1? .)
 
Too Much Garlic said:
Well... some like them... otherwise... the studios would not keep making such films.
Click to expand...

Offer a man a choice of eating McDonalds or nothing and he'll happily wolf down the McDonalds time and time again. Offer him a choice between McDonalds and Chilis and he'll say that Chilis makes the best burgers EVER. I see this as the (likely) difference between any Michael Bay film (or its ilk) and Avatar. That's not to say Chilis makes a bad burger, even, but it ain't Le Cordon Bleu, ya know?
 
Nobody. My point is more that these days you rarely even have a choice AMONG cheeseburgers, let alone the choice of a cheeseburger or coq au vin.
 
Rotwang said:
Cameron has played a very subtle game with Avatar. He seems to have grabbed upon a bunch of demographics and given them each something to chew on.
....
Click to expand...

And the Aliens are tall, thin, and round headed, just like flying saucer - close encounter drawings.

They're cute fuzzy animals, like I mentioned before.

They're ECO, which is a big buzzword right now.

They live in the forest, which is a big fantasy. [few really do it however] All magic creatures live in the forest.

They're being harassed by the big bad dogs and their corporate masters. [just like all the peoples of Earth tossed off their lands by force.]

At least people get it and side with them.
 
Colin Droidmilk said:
So far no one has told me: 'You're wrong, there is no video game camera motion, the character animation is as good as Gollum in LoTR, and the dialogue is as good as Aliens.' Why not?
Click to expand...

Serves me right for not being a video game aficionado, but I'm not entirely sure what is meant by "video game camera motion." I can tell you that owing to the general complexity of Cameron's images he keeps his camera movement to a well motivated minimum. Oh, there are as few dynamic moves to be sure, but in general Cameron allows his camera to linger over the world he's created rather than punch hyper-kinetic holes in it.

As for the comparison to Gollum, there is none. The N'avi represent the best example of CG character animation to date. Gollum is primitive by comparison.

As for the dialogue being as "good" as Aliens, I'd say that's a reasonable comparison. Suffice it to say neither film will distinguish itself in the annals of great cinematic wordplay, but that's as it should be. Whatever Avatar is about, it ain't about the dialogue -- any more than 2001 was.
 
Colin Droidmilk said:
The first serious response, thanks. These are the concerns I had, and you addressed them. And if you're right, I'm tempted. I might go and see it, but honestly, I can only afford to blow money on something I'm really sure I'd like. Sadly, the clips still leave me with doubts. So I'll take a chance on missing out on something good...

Again, don't be too amazed at people like me who are not great earners, refusing to see a film about which they have doubts, when they have been disappointed over and over again, when they have given a film the benefit and gone to see it.
Click to expand...

Wait, wait, wait....

First you say that, upon seeing the clips, that there was "totally sub-Gollum figure animation; totally phoney-looking video-game camera movement, and useless, useless dialogue"

And you take all that back right when someone says, "You're wrong about all that," you completely rescind your statement?

Well... Good. Because any person who said you were wrong on those things would be right, and it's cool that you listened :lol
 
And in regards to it making so much money, well, they say there's an idiot born every minute... you do the math.

:)
 
Jamanticus said:
Wait, wait, wait....

First you say that, upon seeing the clips, that there was "totally sub-Gollum figure animation; totally phoney-looking video-game camera movement, and useless, useless dialogue"

And you take all that back right when someone says, "You're wrong about all that," you completely rescind your statement?

Well... Good. Because any person who said you were wrong on those things would be right, and it's cool that you listened :lol
Click to expand...

Nope. I said to the poster 'if you're right, I'm tempted' - and I should have added, if I shared the sensibilities of the poster(His idea of videogame crud might be different from mine). I then added that the clips still left me with grave doubts. They still do.
Pay attention.
 
This thread is more than 14 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

bwayne64
Next James Bond ?
Replies
2
Views
394
yaris
yaris
The Terminator
Rest in peace James McCaffrey (Max Payne/Rescue Me)
Replies
1
Views
243
George
George
Boba Debt
  • Locked
There is a Sucker Born Every Minute - This one Bought a DL44
Replies
4
Views
488
scarf man
scarf man
Astyanax
The Last Works of James Horner
Replies
9
Views
898
Astyanax
Astyanax
Tremas
This Is Spinal Tap 2 seems to be a go!
Replies
5
Views
450
Bloop
Bloop
Back
Top