James Cameron's 'Avatar' - The next gen of cinema
- Thread starter Hen_Dawg
- Start date
Thats the exact way i felt about this movie, but couldnt put it into words.
So many conflicting issues that it just annoyed the hell out of me.
This is the way I thought I felt about the movie after my first viewing, but on later consideration, and a 2nd viewing, I realised the story isn't particularly "simple", it's just that it's told so smoothly/well. It therefore seems more straight forward than it is, and also explains why (for me/some at least) why nigh on 3hrs goes so very quickly/smoothly.
Yes, in an ideal world the plot/script/characters would have been deeper, but although this detracts from the film, the film seems to sit well as it is, at least IMHO.
Last edited:
So what we are saying is....Leave it a month or 2 and then watch it again.
I can deal with that, i dont want to be a hater
So what we are saying is....Leave it a month or 2 and then watch it again.
I can deal with that, i dont want to be a hater
Maybe
Everyone of course has their own opinion and likes/dislikes. But I think maybe the story isn't quite as simplistic as it may first appear, because it is told exceedingly well/smoothly.
Yes, it's probably Cameron's simplest script, but IMHO the film does quite well anyway
I don't really get too excited by visuals and find storylines, script and acting most important when watching a film, am I going to like this movie at all? I don't want to go and then be bored crapless for 3 hours listening to some garbage storyline/script
I have similar 'values' to yourself... I enjoyed the film. The story is simple, predictable and in a couple of places cheesy. But the alien world you get to visit, in all its beauty and variey is half the reason to see it... The "ride" is a good one...
From your tone, I'd suggest you don't see it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- Uranus
Just seen this in Imax 3D and was very impressed overall, great visuals, good but simplistic story. What was the deal with the floating mountains though?
8 out of 10 from me, deffo getting it on blueray.
8 out of 10 from me, deffo getting it on blueray.
Essentially what you are saying is that film could have been good, but it isn't. Although it is mediocre at best, that's OK. I'm reminded of an old exchange: "There's nothing wrong with being average." "But there's even less wrong with being good."
Yet again we have a science fiction film which panders to the almost universal belief that all you need is good enough 3D SFX and no-one will care about the 2D characters and the 1D plot. No, a simple plot in itself is not a bad thing. Only if it's the same plot that has been endlessly recycled before. There was no courage in the direction, just a plot Disney would have been proud of (I'll ignore the obvious Pocohontas comparison because I haven't seen that), populated by aliens which were ridiculously cute. Making people care about peaceful big blue cat-people is easy; try making me care about violent insectoid aliens - that's challenge for a good director.
M
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 5,488
I haven't watched it yet, but isn't that what District 9 tries to do? At least that's the impression I got from one of the early trailers.
Making people care about big eyed cutesy animals may be easy but getting them to take the film seriously is another matter. So many people were mocking this movie when the teaser was released and they first saw the design of the Na'vi.
Cameron has blatently gone for the centre ground with this movie's script, which is to be expected and is how you make a lot of money. He did the same with Titanic, epic groundbreaking visuals and cardboard cut-out cliched story.
He knows how to make a lot of cash that's for sure.
I'm not saying that at all...
I'm saying the film may have been "better" with a few tweaks to the plot/characters, maybe to add a little more depth in there IMHO.
As it is though, the story is fairly straight forward, but what is left is still a damn enjoyable, well told piece of science fiction. And presented in a new way that really at times set the hairs on the back of my neck standing up.
It's the only film I've seen twice at the cinema in the probably over ten years, which is saynig something
And as for people constantly attacking the story line, I'd say it's story line is not simpler than for exampe "The Road", which people are not attacking. The difference is the content of "The Road" is darker/grittier so has more presence...
Why does a story always have to have depth?
Some of the best stories are the simplest ones.
I think there are to many people suffering from film snobbery syndrome.
I saw it last night.
I never entered the cinema to be educated or challenged or to find hidden meaning.
I went for the ride. A sensory experience.
Thats what I got.
Some of the best stories are the simplest ones.
I think there are to many people suffering from film snobbery syndrome.
I saw it last night.
I never entered the cinema to be educated or challenged or to find hidden meaning.
I went for the ride. A sensory experience.
Thats what I got.
