The unobtanium thing is going to be annoying solely for the fact that people will be doing this for the next 3 months
"What a dumb name!"
"But it's based in reality."
"It's still dumb."
"You're dumb."
"No U."
Regardless of whether it's a real term used by real scientists, Cameron isn't making a documentary here. He thinks he is in the first 90 minutes, but it's a work of narrative fiction. Regardless of the verisimilitude he thinks he's lending the thing by giving it that name, if the name is that distracting, you gotta change it. That's one of the beauties about fiction - if accuracy doesn't make the story you're telling play better, then fuck accuracy.
If he was making a movie about a child who saved another child from a well, and one of the kids was named Transsexxual McCockTuck, you know when the movie was made that kids name would be "Fred," or something.
I've got to say there's plenty to hate about the movie from what I've heard, but why people are getting annoyed by this "unobtainium" thing is beyond me :?
Ed321 on
0
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
edited December 2009
In the context of the movie, Unobtainium is spice. He who controls the spice controls the universe. :P
Also, when the protagonist rides the giant bird for the first time:
Side note: I now have a good definition of Objectivists and Libertarians - the former have basically succeeded in becoming so contrarian they can honestly root for the Colonel when watching Avatar, while the latter merely make sardonic and dismissive complaints about Cameron and Hollywood while desperately wishing that they one day can become as blunt and inane as the Obejctivists.
Or you could just not reduce entire ideologies to convenient caricatures that support your views based on the worst traits of the worst members of that ideology you've ever seen.
Just a thought.
Bring me a libertarian who isn't a sad, complementary reaction to the kind of equally tiring left-winger who says things like "When small countries attack it's terrorism, when big countries attack it's a conflict."
I am not very impressed with my summary there, but my experience with libertarians suggests they are either somewhat detached bowtie-wearing scrubs who desperately try to put a spit-shine to the legacies of Reagan and Thatcher (despite the harm they did to people who don't fall in the demographies right-wingers care for) or glibertarians who feel clever for using the word "Goracle", use the "Econ 101" approach to all issues and desperately rub up to any famous person who is a libertarian in the same way that many gamers desperately clamor for "recognition" and "representation". Objectivists are just disgusting fucks.
A good friend of mine is a Libertarian, and he hates Reagan. American political views and political views in other countries actually differ sometimes. For example, many Conservatives in Canada fully support nationalized health care. Mind you, people are so brainwashed into the "us vs them" bullshit of the American political system these days that it's not even worth trying to have an actual civil discussion of political ideologies.
You've already made up your mind that all libertarians are some caricature you hate, so I'm not going to bother discussing this with you.
Anyway, this is off topic. Let's get back to discussing if this film is worth seeing just for the pretty images or not.
Well it seems my expectations for the film where correct for the most part from what you all describe. I might as well just watch District 9 again than watch this.
If anything the lukewarm reception of this film makes me love District 9 and Blomkamp even more for making an arguably much better film with only around 13% of Avatar's budget.
Now that you mention it, I'm absolutely astounded that District 9 didn't get nearly as much buildup as Avatar.
It actually had a good plot and everything.
Also, I know people are praising Avatar for its whole completely original 3D generated world or whatever, but in my opinion, making the aliens in District 9 believable while standing next to real people, buildings, and environments was much more impressive. Of course generated aliens are going to look good next to generated environments of the same art style.
ALIENS is basically Wrath of Khan, too. The biggest knock on Horner is that he self-plagiarizes like crazy. He does that again here. So if you liked his early 80's stuff, you'll probably like this.
Since we're on the ubject of the film's technical achievements, how impressive are the 'puter generated creatures? I've heard mixed reviews. I know when I watched Beowulf (which had a fraction of the budget and probably less access to the top animators/artists than Cameron did) it was very wonky - parts of the CGI could very easily be mistaken for live-action (though they definately weren't), whilst others looked like Shrek.
ALIENS is basically Wrath of Khan, too. The biggest knock on Horner is that he self-plagiarizes like crazy. He does that again here. So if you liked his early 80's stuff, you'll probably like this.
Thanks man. I'll give it a quick listen on itunes. Nice to know someone else pays attention to scores.
Also, the film isn't getting that lukewarm a reception. But the District 9 comparisons will fly soon enough.
It's just an aside, I didn't really want to veer the thread into comparing the two movies.
Also I suppose 'lukewarm' might be a bad description, it just seems most people are saying the visuals and such are awesome but it doesn't really do anything really interesting story-wise.
Either way I really don't have any intrest in seeing this anytime soon.
manaleak34 on
XBL/Steam:ManaCrevice
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
Now that you mention it, I'm absolutely astounded that District 9 didn't get nearly as much buildup as Avatar.
It actually had a good plot and everything.
Also, I know people are praising Avatar for its whole completely original 3D generated world or whatever, but in my opinion, making the aliens in District 9 believable while standing next to real people, buildings, and environments was much more impressive. Of course generated aliens are going to look good next to generated environments of the same art style.
Because District 9 wasn't being made by the most amazing director in the history of mankind producing the only movie you'll ever need to see in your life, it's just that awesome why aren't you seeing it yet?
Okay, I'm really put off by the marketing for Avatar.
But yes, I prefer my sci-fi movies to be like District 9 in their art and environmental portrayal, that is, with a strive towards realism. As to the story, I suppose I should have expected a falling flat story but it's not really making me more optimistic to seeing the film.
Honestly, that's probably a large part of what's so off-putting about this film. The hype wagon.
It irritates me any and every time there's a huge amount of hype surrounding something mediocre, making it out to be the best thing ever. It may be okay, but since it's being praised as one of the best things ever, and I know it isn't, there's resentment.
Since we're on the ubject of the film's technical achievements, how impressive are the 'puter generated creatures? I've heard mixed reviews. I know when I watched Beowulf (which had a fraction of the budget and probably less access to the top animators/artists than Cameron did) it was very wonky - parts of the CGI could very easily be mistaken for live-action (though they definately weren't), whilst others looked like Shrek.
I thought the humans military machines were the weakest cg elements in the whole thing. Which is a little strange as you would think a robot or chopper would be easier to do than alien species and plants. All the nature stuff and the Nai-vi (or how ever you spell it) looked really good. I thought the only time they faultered was in the wide, large crowd shots. but fortunately there wasn't much of that.
I don't know how much the believability of the cg is due to seeing it in 3D though. Don't think it hurt it at all at any rate.
So is the consensus that the movie is visually amazing but also the most derivative thing since derivatives came to derivativetown and taught calculus? (AKA, gonna win Best Picture over The Hurt Locker)
Plot criticisms aside, you are doing yourself a disservice if you don't see this movie. The story is derivative, but it is very well told. Despite its nearly 3 hour running time, the film never drags for a minute. Pandora is hands down the most beautiful thing I've ever seen put to film. All the cast turn in great performances - with the possible exception of the business guy who is the only person in the movie to refer to "unobtanium" (it is mentioned exactly twice). I blame the actor for not making it come across as a joke, because it is clearly supposed to be.
The whole time I already knew what was going to happen, but that didn't bother me in the slightest, so I'm going to say that James Cameron pulled it off. Sam Worthington was actually fantastic as the lead too - so many times he did or said exactly what I was thinking.
And the effects - Dear God. I can't wait for the Blu Ray to come out, because then I have 2 hours and 40 minutes of incredible beautiful images to pull desktop backgrounds from. This truly is the next generation of computer graphics.
This movie just resonates with me, in other words. Not one of the greatest movies of all time by any stretch, but it is nothing less than a perfect 5/5 from me.
I find it gutsy that Cameron tells the message by making white humans the antagonists and giant blue aliens the protagonists.
making white humans the antagonist is considered gutsy?
you must have missed the last 10 years of political correctness
(edit: looking at the cast list is funny, all the evil human soldiers are white, while all the navi are cast by minorities)
anyway will watch it on monday, but from what I understand the movie sounds like a (a lot) more expensive version of "Battle for Terra"
Now that you mention it, I'm absolutely astounded that District 9 didn't get nearly as much buildup as Avatar.
It actually had a good plot and everything.
Also, I know people are praising Avatar for its whole completely original 3D generated world or whatever, but in my opinion, making the aliens in District 9 believable while standing next to real people, buildings, and environments was much more impressive. Of course generated aliens are going to look good next to generated environments of the same art style.
iirc District 9 also had the white guy going native to save the natives from the white guys. And super-blatant moralizing about political oppression.
And some pretty gaping plot holes, like, what the hell is their ship still doing up there.
And a camera that made me physically ill. Like, had to leave the theater for 40 minutes. So maybe I'm not in a position to judge the movie on the above counts. But then the camerawork was so bad that I had to leave the theater for 40 minutes to avoid throwing up so it doesn't exactly deserve my sympathy.
The camera work wasn't bad at all.
He didn't go native to save the natives in that film. He initially went native to save his own ass, because he was becoming one against his will. It wasn't really a choice. He turned against the humans more because they were hunting him down than anything.
On top of that, the way the plot was handled was the main plus for District 9. It was presented in an interesting, original way.
I liked District 9 because it was refreshingly... Ugly. In a world where they even "improved" upon Angelina Jolie's physique in Beowulf rather than go with the original, I can go for some fucking realism in terms of aesthetics.
I mean, Avatar had a great world, but I think a whole lot of pretty strange factors have to conspire to create the sort of flora, fauna and rock formations you usually see in JRPG concept art and those overwrought digital art wallpapers. So conveniently pretty and glowy and lambent.
That opening shot of Avatar though, where Jake wakes up from his tube? That might actually be the most subtle thing Cameron does in the movie when you realize just what it is he's doing with the 3D. It's like slowly realizing you're INSIDE a spinning rack zoom.
Element BrianPeanut Butter ShillRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
Can we say something about Michelle Rodriguez here?
Did she get her type-cast role? Yes
Did you hate her? ..not so sure.
Even though she still had a similar character to the rest of everything she has ever played ever, this was the one time I actually liked her role, especially
the character relization when she doesn't bomb the tree and then goes and paints herself and the her flyer with war paint
It made me physically ill. I don't know by what other standard I'm supposed to judge it. And I made an effort to sit as far back as possible.
He didn't go native to save the natives in that film. He initially went native to save his own ass, because he was becoming one against his will. It wasn't really a choice. He turned against the humans more because they were hunting him down than anything.
I recall him getting pretty idealistic at the end with his wide-eyed alien buddy.
On top of that, the way the plot was handled was the main plus for District 9. It was presented in an interesting, original way.
Shakycam documentary presentation wasn't even that original back in 1999.
@Kastanj, I've only seen stills of Avatar's world, but there's some weird and beautiful things in coral reefs and the deep sea ecosystems. "Realistic" doesn't have to mean "looks like a Holocaust concentration camp." The natural world can be more beautiful than the most fantastical JRPG settings.
Rodriguez is tolerable in this because she's essentially playing Vasquez. Giovanni Ribisi is basically playing Burke. and Sigourney Weaver is playing Ripley and Dian Fossey's lesbian love child.
People bitching about James Cameron? Got to remember that he wrote/directed Terminator, Terminator 2, Aliens, The Abyss and the Titanic.
That is one fucking awsome list of movies.
Even if you don't like one or two of them (Cough Titanic Cough), remember there are others that adored them to death.
As for me? I saw a midnight screening, liked it. Its not perfect, but then again few movies are. Only pet pevee was Michelle Rodriguez playing Michelle Rodriguez again.
Kipling217 on
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
Posts
I've got to say there's plenty to hate about the movie from what I've heard, but why people are getting annoyed by this "unobtainium" thing is beyond me :?
Also, when the protagonist rides the giant bird for the first time:
.... "Do a barrel roll! (Press Z or R twice)!"
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
A good friend of mine is a Libertarian, and he hates Reagan. American political views and political views in other countries actually differ sometimes. For example, many Conservatives in Canada fully support nationalized health care. Mind you, people are so brainwashed into the "us vs them" bullshit of the American political system these days that it's not even worth trying to have an actual civil discussion of political ideologies.
You've already made up your mind that all libertarians are some caricature you hate, so I'm not going to bother discussing this with you.
Anyway, this is off topic. Let's get back to discussing if this film is worth seeing just for the pretty images or not.
Also, the film isn't getting that lukewarm a reception. But the District 9 comparisons will fly soon enough.
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
The music score man, the music score.
Hmm, I like the music in Khan. How does it stack up to the Aliens score? Any good military style drum rolls?
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
It actually had a good plot and everything.
Also, I know people are praising Avatar for its whole completely original 3D generated world or whatever, but in my opinion, making the aliens in District 9 believable while standing next to real people, buildings, and environments was much more impressive. Of course generated aliens are going to look good next to generated environments of the same art style.
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
Thanks man. I'll give it a quick listen on itunes. Nice to know someone else pays attention to scores.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
It's just an aside, I didn't really want to veer the thread into comparing the two movies.
Also I suppose 'lukewarm' might be a bad description, it just seems most people are saying the visuals and such are awesome but it doesn't really do anything really interesting story-wise.
Either way I really don't have any intrest in seeing this anytime soon.
Because District 9 wasn't being made by the most amazing director in the history of mankind producing the only movie you'll ever need to see in your life, it's just that awesome why aren't you seeing it yet?
Okay, I'm really put off by the marketing for Avatar.
But yes, I prefer my sci-fi movies to be like District 9 in their art and environmental portrayal, that is, with a strive towards realism. As to the story, I suppose I should have expected a falling flat story but it's not really making me more optimistic to seeing the film.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
It irritates me any and every time there's a huge amount of hype surrounding something mediocre, making it out to be the best thing ever. It may be okay, but since it's being praised as one of the best things ever, and I know it isn't, there's resentment.
I thought the humans military machines were the weakest cg elements in the whole thing. Which is a little strange as you would think a robot or chopper would be easier to do than alien species and plants. All the nature stuff and the Nai-vi (or how ever you spell it) looked really good. I thought the only time they faultered was in the wide, large crowd shots. but fortunately there wasn't much of that.
I don't know how much the believability of the cg is due to seeing it in 3D though. Don't think it hurt it at all at any rate.
maybe it's just that i've always been put off by special-effects extravaganzas
i mean, i play video games a lot, so if i want a piece of media that's basically just a vehicle for pretty pictures then i can take my pick
somehow i think movies should deliver a little more than just high-quality cgi, and from all accounts avatar really doesn't
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
We all saw Attack of the Clones. We all saw Jurassic Park. We all saw Mars Attacks!
and only the very end of mars attacks
:shock:
You... haven't seen Jurassic park?
What's wrong with you
To answer your previous question: the effects will probably still be considered good 10 years ago, as Jurassic Parks' visuals are still good.
The whole time I already knew what was going to happen, but that didn't bother me in the slightest, so I'm going to say that James Cameron pulled it off. Sam Worthington was actually fantastic as the lead too - so many times he did or said exactly what I was thinking.
And the effects - Dear God. I can't wait for the Blu Ray to come out, because then I have 2 hours and 40 minutes of incredible beautiful images to pull desktop backgrounds from. This truly is the next generation of computer graphics.
This movie just resonates with me, in other words. Not one of the greatest movies of all time by any stretch, but it is nothing less than a perfect 5/5 from me.
"Ago"? No ninja edit for you.
you must have missed the last 10 years of political correctness
(edit: looking at the cast list is funny, all the evil human soldiers are white, while all the navi are cast by minorities)
anyway will watch it on monday, but from what I understand the movie sounds like a (a lot) more expensive version of "Battle for Terra"
And some pretty gaping plot holes, like, what the hell is their ship still doing up there.
And a camera that made me physically ill. Like, had to leave the theater for 40 minutes. So maybe I'm not in a position to judge the movie on the above counts. But then the camerawork was so bad that I had to leave the theater for 40 minutes to avoid throwing up so it doesn't exactly deserve my sympathy.
He didn't go native to save the natives in that film. He initially went native to save his own ass, because he was becoming one against his will. It wasn't really a choice. He turned against the humans more because they were hunting him down than anything.
On top of that, the way the plot was handled was the main plus for District 9. It was presented in an interesting, original way.
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
I mean, Avatar had a great world, but I think a whole lot of pretty strange factors have to conspire to create the sort of flora, fauna and rock formations you usually see in JRPG concept art and those overwrought digital art wallpapers. So conveniently pretty and glowy and lambent.
You know what I mean, thinking about Jurassic Park got my wires crossed
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
Did she get her type-cast role? Yes
Did you hate her? ..not so sure.
Even though she still had a similar character to the rest of everything she has ever played ever, this was the one time I actually liked her role, especially
Arch,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_goGR39m2k
I recall him getting pretty idealistic at the end with his wide-eyed alien buddy.
Shakycam documentary presentation wasn't even that original back in 1999.
@Kastanj, I've only seen stills of Avatar's world, but there's some weird and beautiful things in coral reefs and the deep sea ecosystems. "Realistic" doesn't have to mean "looks like a Holocaust concentration camp." The natural world can be more beautiful than the most fantastical JRPG settings.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
That is one fucking awsome list of movies.
Even if you don't like one or two of them (Cough Titanic Cough), remember there are others that adored them to death.
As for me? I saw a midnight screening, liked it. Its not perfect, but then again few movies are. Only pet pevee was Michelle Rodriguez playing Michelle Rodriguez again.