Avatar, Avatar's sequels and 3D
- Thread starter Jakub324
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The Naavi were portrayed as the perfect species, physically and sociologically superior to humans, plus they could insert their USB hair thingies and basically control their environment. The humans were mostly portrayed as mustache twirling bad guys who only sought death and destruction.Jakub324 said:
I didn't hate the movie, but I thought it was kinda meh. It was pretty, but meh. The portrayal of the humans as one dimensional bad guys VS the perfect blue space elves kinda grated on me.
But, there's room for improvement, maybe if we think of the first Avatar as an origin story, we can get the deeper, better balanced, more morally challenging dilemmas in future stories.
Its funny that people hate Avatar because its unoriginal when its probably more original than 99% of the movies coming from Hollywood.
I guess its just cool to hate something that becomes really big and popular.
I enjoy watching a traditional story old in an untraditional way. Dont know if it need a sequel though. The first film was something really special, the second wont.
I guess its just cool to hate something that becomes really big and popular.
I enjoy watching a traditional story old in an untraditional way. Dont know if it need a sequel though. The first film was something really special, the second wont.
Are we still having Avatar discussions two years after the movie came out? The only reason people hate the movie is because it made so much damn money. The people who mock it for having an unoriginal story now, are the same monkeys who flung shit at the production costs before the movie even came out. People who said that Avatar was going to "flop" at the box office. Sure, it had a similar story to Dances With Wolves, who gives a shit? The plot was not the primary focus of the movie. Cameron used a familiar story so that you could lose yourself in the world that he meticulously created.
I thought it was a fun movie that was more deserving at the Oscars than the Hurt Locker. But then again, so was every other nominee. I welcome a sequel. I loved Avatar then, and I still love it now. James Cameron's track record with sequels include Aliens and Terminator 2, both really good movies in their own right.
I thought it was a fun movie that was more deserving at the Oscars than the Hurt Locker. But then again, so was every other nominee. I welcome a sequel. I loved Avatar then, and I still love it now. James Cameron's track record with sequels include Aliens and Terminator 2, both really good movies in their own right.
Um... I liked the first one?
Pocahontas-imitation jokes aside, they did the plot well (and besides, name a single plot from any genre in the last 10 years that isn't an imitation on some level), the characters weren't bad, and the visuals were spectacular. I didn't notice the 3D, but that's because you're not supposed to notice the 3D, it's supposed to be seamlessly integrated with the film, and they certainly did that. Watching it in 2D makes me feel like something's not quite right.
I'm not sure how you can be mad when the humans were the bad guys either... I mean, not all of them were, and they were kinda being dicks about the whole unobtainium thing.
Pocahontas-imitation jokes aside, they did the plot well (and besides, name a single plot from any genre in the last 10 years that isn't an imitation on some level), the characters weren't bad, and the visuals were spectacular. I didn't notice the 3D, but that's because you're not supposed to notice the 3D, it's supposed to be seamlessly integrated with the film, and they certainly did that. Watching it in 2D makes me feel like something's not quite right.
I'm not sure how you can be mad when the humans were the bad guys either... I mean, not all of them were, and they were kinda being dicks about the whole unobtainium thing.
This is why the visuals never really impressed me.j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
It looked like random fantasy art, the kind that you find being sold in giftshops or market stalls.
Not that I hate the movie, I just found it remarkably unremarkable.
I don't think he's trying to say what you implied. He's trying to say that the events from Avatar were inspired by real historical events and were transformed into something else to fit into an another setting. In Avatar, it's not so much about humans at all; it's about greedy corporations and corporate system. Greedy corporations are the bad guys who invaded another planet, paid absolutely no respect to the culture of the intelligent beings that lived there, viciously slaughtered their eco-system and thought of themselves as the masters of the universe who have a right to destroy some else's world because they destroyed their own. In history, we have numerous examples of ambitious and/or greedy men (and "corporations") who invaded other lands, paid absolutely no respect to the culture of the people that lived there, viciously slaughtered them, destroyed their homes and their cultures and installed their own beliefs against the will of the natives under the threat of torture and death. There's also instances in history about people who abandoned their own faction and joined the oppressed natives that their faction attacked for no good reason, but out of prejudice, hate and need for power.Jakub324 said:
As far as I remember, the relations with the Na'vis were alright for some time in the beginning, but eventually went to hell because the brutal mining of their planet began destroying their eco-system (and their eco-system works in such way that is strange and alien to humans, but is observable and possible to explain and document through science). The only thing "bad" in that film are corporations, said by Cameron himself. We saw the good and the bad guys in both factions and it makes sense. The only problem was that corporation that wanted its money too early and through violence. They didn't wait long enough for the relations with the Na'vis to settle, and for us to explore them and their culture through and through, good enough to convince them to let us take some of their resources (maybe in some nicer way, without involving heavy deforestation), which they don't use. The Na'vis had the right to defend themselves, just as every single alien invasion movie ever filmed shows humans fighting against and killing aliens that invaded Earth (with the exception of District 9, although we pretty much put those aliens in ghettos and treated them like shit. And we ended up shooting at them after all, if I remember correctly). In Avatar, the roles were reversed; we were the advanced race that developed interstellar travel and invaded the planet inhabited by intelligent, yet somehow "primitive" beings and we were eventually kicked out, just as we kicked out every alien that invaded Earth. I see no reason to be baffled about our inevitable loss at Pandora, at least in the context of cinematography, or to be baffled about some humans "betraying" their species to help the oppressed; it happened in real life too, which was the point of ravensheart18's post (and the "oppressed" don't have to be of another species to count).
Yes, I liked Avatar. The story was simple enough to let me enjoy in other things, rather than train my brain with mind-boggling plot twists and attempts of serious edgy drama. It was very well done, with simple story, characters that I liked enough, a setting that I enjoyed in, a rather important message and universal appeal. No matter where you live, how you live, who you are and what you are, Avatar is film that you'd understand, and it reminds me greatly of Disney cartoons for example. None of them has a particularly original plot, but pretty much everyone enjoys watching them and understands them. The destroying of the Hometree was similar in many ways to, for example, the death of Mufasa in Lion king, in terms of shameless emotional manipulation. Of course, that's just my opinion, I don't think everyone must like that film. It's not my favourite film ever, but it somehow "clicked" with me and it's pretty high on my list. Also, I watched in both 2D and 3D and liked it in 2D better. I am somewhat excited for the sequels; I'd like to see some more info on the setting, especially the state of Earth, and maybe to see some more engaging plot.
I dont think a sequel is needed. Avatar wasnt a bad film. Just an overhyped movie.Oh, and avatar´s 3d isn´t all that.
You forgot "Make 'John Smith' go native instead of just acting as a peacemaker", "put a lot of emphasis on showing the culture of the Na'vi", "give the protagonist actual conflicting loyalties instead of simply trying to stop pointless bloodshed", "actually have the protagonist spend an extended period of time with and become a full part of the tribe "...wait, how was this supposed to be identical to Pocahontas again? Seriously, that movie's similarity is superficial at best, and I have very little respect for the claim that Avatar was derived from it.ninjastovall0 said:
Now, on the flipside I can see people comparing Avatar to Dances with Wolves, The Last Samurai, or Lawrence of Arabia. Those comparisons are far more accurate as they've got similar plots, similar emphasis and similar results. In fact, they're all pretty typical of the "Going Native" plotline in general, which existed LONG before any of those films...by historical precidence if nothing else.
Don't get me wrong, I consider "Avatar" to be at best about average overall if you take the impressive visuals and 3D stuff out.
But still, the amount of hate directed towards it is mind-boggling.
Regarding the extended edition - has anybody bashing it actually SEEN it ?
There's a couple of scenes there that make the plot a whole lot more palatable compared to the first release I have seen.
There's a scene right at the start (which I am pretty sure was not in the original) which shows the protagonist struggling as a wheelchair vet, being very angry at the world as a whole, yearning for "SOMETHING" to actually believe in, to dedicate itself to it.
IMO, it's relevant because it shows how the promise of new legs was simply not enough of a "bribe" to keep him in line.
There are a few flora/fauna scenes which are not important, but nice.
There's an extended love-making scene which, meh, who cares about smurf sex.
There's also some additional hunting instructions scenes, some communal scenes and such, not filling any major plot holes, but nice enough in easing us into how Jake "goes native".
And near the end, there's one more scene where the former chief-to-be (which you thought just died) is asking Jake to be "his last shadow" (makes sense in context if you know what I mean).
But there are also some more scenes which are actually important to the plot.
One of those is right when they first go out in the helicopter thingy, they go to the former school, and it's all shot up, some talk happens, and later on in another scene also, Sigourney Weaver ends up explaining what actually happened.
Basically, Neytiri had a sister, and THAT sister went up with a bunch of other tribal warriors to destroy "company equipment", then the security forces tracked them down, back to the school, and in a firefight killed them all. That was the last day any blue guys ever came to the school. The doctor had pictures of everybody there and explains that Neytiri was basically her star pupil, but she couldn't forgive the humans for what happened.
That should nicely explain the complete lack of trust the natives are showing beyond what's just implied.
Then, after the "bashing camera on huge bulldozer" incident, there was another scene after the tribe finds out what happened, where the idea is that the path those machines took was not exactly accidental at all, and a raiding party sets out to burn the machines... but you see that a second team coming over to inspect the wreckage ALSO finds the bodies of the small security force that WAS accompanying the machines - if memory serves right, there's 6 people dead.
That explains why the rest of the humans are so eager to go looking for a fight, how would YOU feel if six of your colleagues just got murdered right after your trucks just leveled some random trees (as far as you know). Remember, this is not a government/military operation, in spite of the gear and the military-like command structure ; it's a corporation.
All in all, I have no idea why they cut THOSE scenes before and left a lot of the other less important ones in in the first place.
And there's quite a few other deleted scenes too, but, eh.
Oh, and about making a sequel... do you HONESTLY expect a high-tech planet to just GIVE UP entirely on obtaining some vital resource just because the low-tech planet natives won a battle against a paramilitary-staffed mining op base ?
No... you come back with MORE DAKKA and level the natives if no diplomatic solution can be reached. That's what would happen in reality. That's what KEPT on happening in the real life, many times over.
So you bet there's enough reason to have a sequel, or even more.
But it's probably going to be a lot more political.
But still, the amount of hate directed towards it is mind-boggling.
Regarding the extended edition - has anybody bashing it actually SEEN it ?
There's a couple of scenes there that make the plot a whole lot more palatable compared to the first release I have seen.
There's a scene right at the start (which I am pretty sure was not in the original) which shows the protagonist struggling as a wheelchair vet, being very angry at the world as a whole, yearning for "SOMETHING" to actually believe in, to dedicate itself to it.
IMO, it's relevant because it shows how the promise of new legs was simply not enough of a "bribe" to keep him in line.
There are a few flora/fauna scenes which are not important, but nice.
There's an extended love-making scene which, meh, who cares about smurf sex.
There's also some additional hunting instructions scenes, some communal scenes and such, not filling any major plot holes, but nice enough in easing us into how Jake "goes native".
And near the end, there's one more scene where the former chief-to-be (which you thought just died) is asking Jake to be "his last shadow" (makes sense in context if you know what I mean).
But there are also some more scenes which are actually important to the plot.
One of those is right when they first go out in the helicopter thingy, they go to the former school, and it's all shot up, some talk happens, and later on in another scene also, Sigourney Weaver ends up explaining what actually happened.
Basically, Neytiri had a sister, and THAT sister went up with a bunch of other tribal warriors to destroy "company equipment", then the security forces tracked them down, back to the school, and in a firefight killed them all. That was the last day any blue guys ever came to the school. The doctor had pictures of everybody there and explains that Neytiri was basically her star pupil, but she couldn't forgive the humans for what happened.
That should nicely explain the complete lack of trust the natives are showing beyond what's just implied.
Then, after the "bashing camera on huge bulldozer" incident, there was another scene after the tribe finds out what happened, where the idea is that the path those machines took was not exactly accidental at all, and a raiding party sets out to burn the machines... but you see that a second team coming over to inspect the wreckage ALSO finds the bodies of the small security force that WAS accompanying the machines - if memory serves right, there's 6 people dead.
That explains why the rest of the humans are so eager to go looking for a fight, how would YOU feel if six of your colleagues just got murdered right after your trucks just leveled some random trees (as far as you know). Remember, this is not a government/military operation, in spite of the gear and the military-like command structure ; it's a corporation.
All in all, I have no idea why they cut THOSE scenes before and left a lot of the other less important ones in in the first place.
And there's quite a few other deleted scenes too, but, eh.
Oh, and about making a sequel... do you HONESTLY expect a high-tech planet to just GIVE UP entirely on obtaining some vital resource just because the low-tech planet natives won a battle against a paramilitary-staffed mining op base ?
No... you come back with MORE DAKKA and level the natives if no diplomatic solution can be reached. That's what would happen in reality. That's what KEPT on happening in the real life, many times over.
So you bet there's enough reason to have a sequel, or even more.
But it's probably going to be a lot more political.