James Cameron's Avatar
- Thread starter Sheva Alomar
- Start date
ForceStealer
Double Growth
Damn that movie was horrible. Like...really bad. The story was even more heavy-handed and preachy than I was anticipating. Could the two sides have been any more one-dimensional? The Navi were unspeakably perfect in every conceivable way, the humans were unspeakably evil in every conceivable way.
In the hundreds of movies this can be compared to, someone mentioned the Last Samurai. Now, I actually liked that movie, and it helped that the samurai weren't so damned perfect that you had no freaking choice but to side with them. They led a brutal lifestyle where shame meant death with no chance for redemption and women had no rights. The evil american in their ranks actually brought in some of the good from his culture to add to the good of theirs (convincing Katsumoto not to kill himself when shamed but to fight through it, or helping Taka with household chores).
And I'm not claiming The Last Samurai to be a pinnacle of artistic movietelling, far from it. But the point is it wasn't so incredibly black and white. It wasn't evil america vs perfect japan. In fact the real villain was Mr. Omouri. People on both sides had at least some semblance of justification.
Not in this movie, James Cameron didn't go for allegory or subtle messages. There was nothing subtle about it, or well done. The marines being a bunch of ooo-rah beer-swilling rednecks was bad enough, Cameron repeatedly stopping to the movie to come up with some inane way to show us the colonel was evil beyond any glimmer of a doubt was worse still, but I really lost faith in him at "We will fight terror with terror!"
...really? When in doubt, put some Bush allegory in your movie, since everyone hates Bush, people will like your movie. And the oil allegory wasn't clear enough, he even brought in the blanket terrorist hatred the former president was so panned for.
Except that it didn't fit the context of the movie AT ALL. The Navi had done NOTHING to warrant a statement like that. As stated, the Navi are a race of Mary Sues. Regardless of how poorly thought-out Bush's plans were, there was 9/11 for the basis, this had nothing, and exposes an already crushingly obvious political statement as being there for that sole purpose.
Especially since other topics on this board have cited this kind of lazy storytelling as a reason why video games cannot be viewed as 'literature' or 'art' but movies can and this one will be "one for the history books" makes me call large bullshits.
Everyone is so willing to give this movie a passing grade because the visuals are great. And they are. But a lot of people, and lot of people on this board, would not give Advent Children the shoo-in for graphics when they didn't like its story. And I think even they would have to admit that even the most pessimistic view of Advent Children shows better writing than Cameron's laziest 15-year effort I've ever seen.
/rant
In the hundreds of movies this can be compared to, someone mentioned the Last Samurai. Now, I actually liked that movie, and it helped that the samurai weren't so damned perfect that you had no freaking choice but to side with them. They led a brutal lifestyle where shame meant death with no chance for redemption and women had no rights. The evil american in their ranks actually brought in some of the good from his culture to add to the good of theirs (convincing Katsumoto not to kill himself when shamed but to fight through it, or helping Taka with household chores).
And I'm not claiming The Last Samurai to be a pinnacle of artistic movietelling, far from it. But the point is it wasn't so incredibly black and white. It wasn't evil america vs perfect japan. In fact the real villain was Mr. Omouri. People on both sides had at least some semblance of justification.
Not in this movie, James Cameron didn't go for allegory or subtle messages. There was nothing subtle about it, or well done. The marines being a bunch of ooo-rah beer-swilling rednecks was bad enough, Cameron repeatedly stopping to the movie to come up with some inane way to show us the colonel was evil beyond any glimmer of a doubt was worse still, but I really lost faith in him at "We will fight terror with terror!"
...really? When in doubt, put some Bush allegory in your movie, since everyone hates Bush, people will like your movie. And the oil allegory wasn't clear enough, he even brought in the blanket terrorist hatred the former president was so panned for.
Except that it didn't fit the context of the movie AT ALL. The Navi had done NOTHING to warrant a statement like that. As stated, the Navi are a race of Mary Sues. Regardless of how poorly thought-out Bush's plans were, there was 9/11 for the basis, this had nothing, and exposes an already crushingly obvious political statement as being there for that sole purpose.
Especially since other topics on this board have cited this kind of lazy storytelling as a reason why video games cannot be viewed as 'literature' or 'art' but movies can and this one will be "one for the history books" makes me call large bullshits.
Everyone is so willing to give this movie a passing grade because the visuals are great. And they are. But a lot of people, and lot of people on this board, would not give Advent Children the shoo-in for graphics when they didn't like its story. And I think even they would have to admit that even the most pessimistic view of Advent Children shows better writing than Cameron's laziest 15-year effort I've ever seen.
/rant
Interslicery
.....
On a movie podcast I listen to, one of them said something really interesting, about how they so much fuckin money into this movie, in order to sell it to a wide audience they needed a safe storyline. It was simply too much money to risk for a movie studio
Dee
sweet dee
- AKA
- Bun, Academic
You know what pissed me off? I don't know if it's been mentioned before, but the sound clips they used for the animals. A couple of them were stolen directly from Jurassic Park( t-rex and raptors), I'm pretty sure. They didn't even bother to try and make the animals sound otherworldly or innovative. I thought that was pretty cheap.
Tennyo
Higher Further Faster
Meh, I don't think that's anything huge. Maybe they just decided to step away from the idea that animals would HAVE to sound all otherworldly and maybe they do sound like what we got here.
Also, deleted sex scene: http://dscriber.com/home/990-avatar-sensual-love-scene-cut-from-film.html
Does this mean that every time they connect with an animal it's bestiality?
Also, deleted sex scene: http://dscriber.com/home/990-avatar-sensual-love-scene-cut-from-film.html
Does this mean that every time they connect with an animal it's bestiality?
ForceStealer
Double Growth
Also, Force, I liked AC, so meh.
Come on Ten, you know I love AC, but a lot of people don't, and I believe I saw people here that slam it for reasons they were willing to ignore for Avatar for some reason. Could be wrong though.
X-SOLDIER
Harbinger O Great Justice
- AKA
- X
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with having clear cut good guys & bad guys? Quite often when people are put in a position where they are vastly technologically superior, and have the means to achieve an objective that they are ordered to, they're willing to go to any lengths to do so. This isn't a piece of history, where you're meant to feel conflict over what each side is doing to the other.
When the humans show up on Pandora, they're sent on company orders to obtain the valuable mineral on this world. & they set up a base & set to move the Na'vi out of their home, with no regard for the people who live there. When jobs like this need to be done, you send people that are willing to do it without question, not someone who might turn on you, and make you lose a profit. There's no reason to sympathize with the military forces there, because they have none for the Na'vi.
For reference, here's another James Cameron film that has some parallels (at a stretch). In Aliens, the Xenomorphs ONLY invade the colony on LV-426 because they're specifically brought back on company orders. As much as you dislike the Aliens in the film, they're really just a plot device in the company expending lives to obtain something of great value to them at any cost. Overall, no matter how cold and brutal the aliens are, you really hate Carter Burke, because he'll knowingly sacrifice the lives of innocent people to get what he wants. In this situation, the Xenomorphs can't be negotiated with, and will try to kill you at any turn, so there's really no regret nuking them into oblivion, cause if not, they're spread, and kill you anyways.
Avatar is different. It's a story about knowingly taking part in, or by omission of action, allowing the Na'vi to be forcibly re-located, and killed over a profit, without seeking a diplomatic solution in any way. There doesn't NEED to be any gray area with the marines. The only people who see the Na'Vi, and the other life on the world as anything other than an obstacle are the scientists, and they're being forcible detained at every turn. Movies like the Last Samurai want you to think about that grey area, but that's not the message here.
There's nothing wrong with strong simle messages in a film that rely on black and white enemies, because it's the main character that sits in the grey area, and the film follows their shift from one side to the other.
District 9 does the same thing. The Prawn end up on earth- somewhere they don't intend to, and are stuck there. They interfere with everything, and the local people want them to leave, because they don't mesh well. Wikus starts out as a company man for MNU, who's manipulating the Prawn out of their homes into a new place he later describes as "concentration camps." Meanwhile his company is using them like animals to stockpile weapons, and attempt to use them (much like W-Y wants to do with the Xenomorphs in Aliens). It's when he's put in the position of being reduced to nothing but a simple, expendable, physical asset, by the head of MNU (not to mention his father-in-law) and no one sees him as a person anymore that he sees the full picture from the other side.
The film is about the experience of being brought into the world of Pandora, and being totally immersed in the science fiction's mythos. Following through, and getting to ensure that the things that you end up caring about in the film get saved. That's why I (and so many others) have enjoyed the film. It's the immersion that the film gives. It's the experience that caters to the feelings of it's audience. So what if there's a Bush allegory. That sort of military action has been performed countless times, and more relevantly in the old west with the Native Americans, and it's something that people identify with. This is the same sort of overanalyzation that 300 was a polotical staement about the War in Iraq. It's a movie about the fucking Greeks and Persians. Of course some things are going to be relevant, because we're flawed people and we still go to war. If you keep trying to just reduce aspects of this film into a plain socio-political commentary, you're missing the point. Not everything needs subtle undertones of context to succeed or be interesting. The movie is about the journey of a person becoming one of the Na'vi, and fighting to defend something beautiful.
Honestly, it's fine if you didn't enjoy the film, because nothing's perfect. There's plenty of so-called "great" or high-grossing films that I just couldn't get in to (the first that comes to mind is the Sixth Sense). Don't just assime that it keeps being the #1 film, and people are just giving it a passing grade due to it's visuals.
Anyhows, I don't meant to stir up a big discussion, I just want to put out a kinda thorough statement that there is something really good to this movie, and if you don't like it, that's fine, but there's a valid reason this movie's kicking ass left and right. Sorry if I repeat myself a bit, but I'm pretty tired. Either way, hopefully this was of some value to those who read it. Now that I'm through with my tl;dr post, I'm gonna wander away from this thread.
X
When the humans show up on Pandora, they're sent on company orders to obtain the valuable mineral on this world. & they set up a base & set to move the Na'vi out of their home, with no regard for the people who live there. When jobs like this need to be done, you send people that are willing to do it without question, not someone who might turn on you, and make you lose a profit. There's no reason to sympathize with the military forces there, because they have none for the Na'vi.
For reference, here's another James Cameron film that has some parallels (at a stretch). In Aliens, the Xenomorphs ONLY invade the colony on LV-426 because they're specifically brought back on company orders. As much as you dislike the Aliens in the film, they're really just a plot device in the company expending lives to obtain something of great value to them at any cost. Overall, no matter how cold and brutal the aliens are, you really hate Carter Burke, because he'll knowingly sacrifice the lives of innocent people to get what he wants. In this situation, the Xenomorphs can't be negotiated with, and will try to kill you at any turn, so there's really no regret nuking them into oblivion, cause if not, they're spread, and kill you anyways.
Avatar is different. It's a story about knowingly taking part in, or by omission of action, allowing the Na'vi to be forcibly re-located, and killed over a profit, without seeking a diplomatic solution in any way. There doesn't NEED to be any gray area with the marines. The only people who see the Na'Vi, and the other life on the world as anything other than an obstacle are the scientists, and they're being forcible detained at every turn. Movies like the Last Samurai want you to think about that grey area, but that's not the message here.
There's nothing wrong with strong simle messages in a film that rely on black and white enemies, because it's the main character that sits in the grey area, and the film follows their shift from one side to the other.
District 9 does the same thing. The Prawn end up on earth- somewhere they don't intend to, and are stuck there. They interfere with everything, and the local people want them to leave, because they don't mesh well. Wikus starts out as a company man for MNU, who's manipulating the Prawn out of their homes into a new place he later describes as "concentration camps." Meanwhile his company is using them like animals to stockpile weapons, and attempt to use them (much like W-Y wants to do with the Xenomorphs in Aliens). It's when he's put in the position of being reduced to nothing but a simple, expendable, physical asset, by the head of MNU (not to mention his father-in-law) and no one sees him as a person anymore that he sees the full picture from the other side.
The film is about the experience of being brought into the world of Pandora, and being totally immersed in the science fiction's mythos. Following through, and getting to ensure that the things that you end up caring about in the film get saved. That's why I (and so many others) have enjoyed the film. It's the immersion that the film gives. It's the experience that caters to the feelings of it's audience. So what if there's a Bush allegory. That sort of military action has been performed countless times, and more relevantly in the old west with the Native Americans, and it's something that people identify with. This is the same sort of overanalyzation that 300 was a polotical staement about the War in Iraq. It's a movie about the fucking Greeks and Persians. Of course some things are going to be relevant, because we're flawed people and we still go to war. If you keep trying to just reduce aspects of this film into a plain socio-political commentary, you're missing the point. Not everything needs subtle undertones of context to succeed or be interesting. The movie is about the journey of a person becoming one of the Na'vi, and fighting to defend something beautiful.
Honestly, it's fine if you didn't enjoy the film, because nothing's perfect. There's plenty of so-called "great" or high-grossing films that I just couldn't get in to (the first that comes to mind is the Sixth Sense). Don't just assime that it keeps being the #1 film, and people are just giving it a passing grade due to it's visuals.
Anyhows, I don't meant to stir up a big discussion, I just want to put out a kinda thorough statement that there is something really good to this movie, and if you don't like it, that's fine, but there's a valid reason this movie's kicking ass left and right. Sorry if I repeat myself a bit, but I'm pretty tired. Either way, hopefully this was of some value to those who read it. Now that I'm through with my tl;dr post, I'm gonna wander away from this thread.
X
ForceStealer
Double Growth
It is not overanalyzation at all, and that's my point. I never actually heard about 300 like that, and don't see it at all, so I agree that that is overanalyzation. I think they did it with Star Wars Episode III too.
But here, as I said, it's just too blatantly apparent that he needed a Bush allegory in the film even though it doesn't fit. I highly doubt anyone thought of anything else at the "fight terror with terror" line. And that'd be one thing if actually applied within the context of the movie but it doesn't in the slightest.
If the military had attacked earlier and the Navi completely tore their force to shreds and did some ritual to the bodies that was respectful for them but horrible to the rednecks, maybe. Or he could have even gone truther on us and have the military stage some sort of unprovoked attack by the Navi. But the Nave had literally done NOTHING, even from the point of view from the military, to justify the use of word terror. That's what made the "allegory" so transparent and irritating.
As for the plot though, that's you're opinion and isn't anything to dispute. It's not so much that I have a problem with black and white moral movies, but it just came off as really preachy to me. I really don't look for allegories in movies, I promise. I get swept up in stories pretty well, the fact that this one grated on me so indicated to me it was especially thinly veiled. Maybe it was them plugging their hair into trees I dunno. lol
Interslicery
.....
Its not the only reused sound effect.
Interslicery
.....
Actually no one knows where the Wilhelm Scream first came from. It was first used in some movie where a guy gets eaten by a crocodile, and was called "man gets eaten by crocodile" until that movie at the begining of that clip made it popular with sound editors. it was an inside joke until the public caught wind of it.They should do that with all the sound effects. Would be interesting to see where they actually all originated.
Cthulhu
Administrator
- AKA
- Yop
I have that with door sounds, some screams and the like. Door sounds used in TES 3 Morrowind are used very often in movies, and since I heard those like, millions of times, I recognise them almost instantly
. Or the scream you hear when you click on one of the Terran buildings (research lab?), it's used in at least three movies or other clips I've seen.And I still hear sound effects from Doom in new stuff.
Really, would it be that hard / expensive to make new sound effects or to not use the same sound effect Everyone Else uses?
X said:
It is when it's in a movie that tries to be serious and convey a message. I mean... "The whale is one of the most endangered species in the world. This is a Japanese whaler, caught on hidden camera: 'HAI! WE FIGHTERU TERROR WITH TERRORU! TO THE LAST I GRAPPLE WITH THEE! FROM HELL'S HEART I STAB AT THEE! FOR HATE'S SAKE I SPIT MY LAST BREATH AT THEE! THIS IS SPARTAA!'"... just isn't working. It's like saying all blacks are poor and smoke weed all day whilst listening to whoever's the new gangsta idol right now, whilst the whites are the upholders of all things cultured, posh, and pipe-smoking whilst listening to opera music some dead guy made over nine thousand years ago.
Just no. Imho, off course.
X said:
But not when there's at least ten times as much hippies (which I'm sure will have multiplied in the future) that'll go 'NOES PROTECT TEH
Besides, aren't the smurfs supposed to be vastly superior to mankind? If they are, they could simply go 'I sell you
...nevermind, they are. Vastly superior, yet still dumb / na'ïve as fuck.
X said:
It's not overanalyzation when it's that obvious.
Also, I made the Wilhelm Scream.
. Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_media_that_employ_the_Wilhelm_scream
Dee
sweet dee
- AKA
- Bun, Academic
That's exactly what I wonder. I'm not saying they have to be completely new sounds we've never heard before, but at least take the time to make things seamless where it counts. I recognized those noises the split second they happened and it just pissed me off so much; not that they pretty much ripped the noises off, but it just took away from the finished product.
OneWingedDemon
NOT AMUSED
Huh? Those were intentional last I heard. JC is a JP fanboy.
Like naming the thing unobtainium as an inside geek joke.
Like naming the thing unobtainium as an inside geek joke.
Dee
sweet dee
- AKA
- Bun, Academic
As big of a fan I am of Jurassic Park, I would never rip off sound clips from the movie and run my mouth about how amazing and new and innovative the world of Pandora is.
Cthulhu
Administrator
- AKA
- Yop
Both ripping sounds (on a movie that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make) and a complete lack in originality or even proper covering up your use of Unobtanium (copied from The Core) and the concepts behind that (see the article, it's a commonly used trope) are just fail, imho. I mean, you can make a good, safe story that'll work and that'll make your references to other stuff slightly less painfully obvious for the budget Avatar got, especially if you spend fifteen years on it. And playing it safe? I don't believe someone that truly believes he has a story to tell (and a good one) would cut out the non-painfully-obvious or black-and-white bits, not if you're truly proud of your story.
OneWingedDemon
NOT AMUSED
He didn't rip them off. You make it sound as if he just had nothing else or couldn't have someone record some fuckin animal sounds for him. That's not the case. He's a REALLY big JP fanboy and it's his way of paying homage to it.
It wasn't placed there thinking he'd get away with it and hopefully no one would notice. A lot of people did.
It wasn't placed there thinking he'd get away with it and hopefully no one would notice. A lot of people did.
Dee
sweet dee
- AKA
- Bun, Academic
There is absolutely nothing wrong with deconstructing, thinking critically and analyzing something; be it a movie, a book, media advertising. It's just who I am. I can't help that I notice these things and that they irk the hell out of me.
I understand what you're saying about Cameron wanting to pay homage, but I still think it was a cheap move.
I understand what you're saying about Cameron wanting to pay homage, but I still think it was a cheap move.