avatar was fantastic in imax 3d. people need to get a grip every movie cant be star wars or star trek.
Avatar reminds me of something...
- Thread starter CriticallyAcclaimed
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I didn't expect you to think I hadn't done any research on my name.Amethyst Wind said:
Well, we can't all get what we expect.
Anyway, without divulging my last name on the Internet (bad idea seeing as I'm one of three with it in the entire country), I have indeed traced every form of the two combining factors of my full surname. Never before have either been used together in anyway I have been able to find. Is it true that they still may have? Possibly. But in my honest opinion, I highly doubt it.
trekkie fanboys always bash movies without fat ass shatner the wrath of khan was good but the other movies sucked
There's the problem right there. You're relying on documentation to form your opinion. Documentation as a practice has existed for far less time that the civilizations that practice it. We have no way of knowing one way or the other whether or not your name did exist before people started having their names nationally recorded, but names have a much longer life than people, they don't change much, if at all, over time. It's not impossible, but I really do find it hard to believe, half-and-half or not, that your name hasn't been employed before.Ghonzor said:
Of course if we include middle names in the equation then I'm fucked, but aside from that I find it hard to believe that most, if not all, first and second name combinations haven't already been explored before this generation.
You were right in one respect actually. I fully expected you to have done some research on your name, you seemed the type, I just had a feeling you might stop at what you could 'know', not what could have come before. You assumed that when I said you hadn't looked far enough, it was in terms of what has been written, whereas I meant you hadn't looked far enough into the realms of what could have been. It was a subtle form of baiting, thanks for playing along.
But...this definitely isn't the standard case, is it? Your name is unique, but the vast majority of names aren't. The point is, a few exceptions don't derail a general hypothesis.Ghonzor said:
Back on track, you'd better get used to unoriginality. Apparently, Cameron was thinking of making a trilogy out of this even before it was released, and considering the movie has already topped $1 billion in takings, I think it's pretty much certain a sequel will follow now.
I've never seen that before but now you post it, I never realised just how close they were...... Cameron might just get his ass sued soon enoughponcho14 said:
Are we sure this thread was written about a month ago, back when the radical suggestion that Avatars plot was slightly similar to that of numerous other works of fiction would only have been extremely annoying as opposed to simply downright infuriating?
Other than that, what Furburt and many other people posting in this thread said.
Other than that, what Furburt and many other people posting in this thread said.
Pretty much this. You are not clever nor smart for finding out that Avatar is unoriginal.Nerdfury said:
MovieBob even called it out.
Avatar doesn't claim to have a story that no one's heard before. What makes it original and exciting is just how immersive and fascinating the world is.
And besides, it's not a secret that about 99% of movies follow the same basic structure, and the only major recent movies that I can think of that don't are Burn After Reading, Sex and the City and No Country for Old Men. And each one of those movies bored me to tears.
And besides, it's not a secret that about 99% of movies follow the same basic structure, and the only major recent movies that I can think of that don't are Burn After Reading, Sex and the City and No Country for Old Men. And each one of those movies bored me to tears.
I'd call it Pocohontas smashed together with the charatcter concept art of Halo Wars and the Warcraft series.
I really did love the movie though.
I really did love the movie though.
You know what else is a rip-off of another movie? About 70% of the zombie apocalypse movies made after the first one (I can't remember who's it was, someone else will get it).
That's why it's a sub-genre. Because it's been done that many times. Once someone comes up with a good name for this, we can call this a sub-genre.
Why not? That's what happens when a plot is copied thousands of times over. I could easily blame some romance movie for following the same plot line as another one, because of the romance element, and the same basic plot as the first one that came up. I don't, because that would be calling it a romance movie.
Once it's been done this often, we no longer should really judge it on its plot. Rather, judge it based on the deviations from the plot structure it makes, and outstanding features.
There's the immersion, and the, believe it or not, diverse characters, and the outstanding cinemtography, and the pioneering of new ways to make movies.
Why do we complain about it being a part of the save-the-natives subgenre? I wouldn't as soon judge Sherlock Holmes for being a part of the detective movie subgenre.
Sorry, I didn't mean for that to sound condescending. I'm just hoping that it makes us think a bit more about how we're categorizing originality now.
That's why it's a sub-genre. Because it's been done that many times. Once someone comes up with a good name for this, we can call this a sub-genre.
Why not? That's what happens when a plot is copied thousands of times over. I could easily blame some romance movie for following the same plot line as another one, because of the romance element, and the same basic plot as the first one that came up. I don't, because that would be calling it a romance movie.
Once it's been done this often, we no longer should really judge it on its plot. Rather, judge it based on the deviations from the plot structure it makes, and outstanding features.
There's the immersion, and the, believe it or not, diverse characters, and the outstanding cinemtography, and the pioneering of new ways to make movies.
Why do we complain about it being a part of the save-the-natives subgenre? I wouldn't as soon judge Sherlock Holmes for being a part of the detective movie subgenre.
Sorry, I didn't mean for that to sound condescending. I'm just hoping that it makes us think a bit more about how we're categorizing originality now.
/threadponcho14 said:By any chance did you see the picture from funnyjunk?
Sure the story may be virtually the same as an old classic but, James Cameron did create an entire culture (based on native americans) and planet. Though the cultural reference is obvious the movie is still epic.
All this way into the thread and I'm one of the many to just agree with Furburt, for his opinion is the most concise and relevant.Furburt said:
I couldn't really care less about plot similarities any more, since every plot ever seems to have been done to death with different locations, races and time periods.
But I thought Avatar was absolutely brilliant.