37? I thought there were less. I study media and with that, writing, so I am fully aware there are no original plots. The trick is finding new ways to tell those stories. The only new thing Cameron's done here is elevate the CGI bar for film. The colonel was a sterotype from the beginning, and his dialogue was so cartoonish that I knew he would eventually go batshit crazy and get into a brall with Jake. He did it with a mech, which I will grant was cool.funguy2121 said:You seem to insinuate a connection between James Cameron and (no, it would be cliche to invoke the name of Michael Bay here, so...) Jan De Bont (Speed, Speed 2: Cruise Control [please laugh along with me] and Twister[puke]).kawaiiamethist said:That first part, eh, what?funguy2121 said:Yes, it's kind of like the story that 15 year old kid in the 7 11 told you about how he hurt his leg running from the cops and then the nurse at the hospital "totally ended up blowing him." It's a wives' tale, for insipid people.kawaiiamethist said:Shit, I'm more depressed Cameron didn't put as much effort into his script and fleshing out his characters that he did in creating that world.
Tell me, who's lead should Cameron have followed in fleshing out his characters and script? Who did a much better job on what movie?
As for the second, Cameron's problem is that he took his sterotypes and ran with them. The bad guys were cartoon characters and the good guys were your standard goodie goodies. I'm especially disappointed with the villains of the piece, because they were given nothing beyond greedy and mental.
We all know there's an audience for movies produced purely for spectacle (Transformers, for example), and if I believed this was one of those I wouldn't be so hard on it, but Cameron was trying to make a statement about the evils of collonialism and environmental devastation. He did it in a such a dumbed downed, morning cartoon fashion that I couldn't get lost in this world or the message. I'm not trying to be a troll, and if you loved this movie, that's great, you got your money's worth, but for me, to see such care taken with the graphics and little with the script, it's a disappointment.
37 stories, bud. Look it up. Only 37 stories in the world.
Now, in critique of this film (which I thoroughly enjoyed - the police removed the soiled towel and escorted me to the nearest jail), I would agree that the Colonel BECAME a sterotype by the third act and that Giovanni Ribisi's character was never sussed out. However, both the beloved Sigorney Weaver's character and that of new discovery Sam Worthington were nuanced, conflicted characters. This was even experienced in their not liking each other at first, and how the Hell do I explain my sexual attraction to "Ripley's" avatar - ugg!
It could indeed have been better fleshed out. But, as I've stated probably a dozen times here, Avatar was no less original than the first Star Wars Trilogy (the Bible, Beowulf, Flash Gordon, etc.), though arguably it wasn't as well directed as Empire (sorry - have to clean off my keyboard now).
![]()
James Cameron is not Michael Bay, I would never make that insuation. Cameron knows how to make excellent, thoughtful movies, I've seen him do it, whereas Bay...well, he's a lost cause. Avatar's script was too paint by numbers; it never gave the audience anything to figure out and we were never guessing at anything. I knew what sort of movie I was going to see walking in there, I just wasn't expecting to predict the plot points so well before they happened.
Avatar for me was half a movie. One half was amazing graphics, the other was a hollow story with hollow characters. Just because one half was awesome, doesn't mean he gets a slide on the other. I'm not prepared to accept it was supposed to be for a kids, because this was obviously a family movie, and given the overwhelming popularity of Pixar films, he should know that family audiences demand tight scripts to go with the pretty pictures.