Avatar - James Cameron Returns! (Spoilers in thread, obviously!)

Batutta said:
Yeah, I'm just saying even something as black and white about the concept of evil as the Star Wars saga threw in characters like Han Solo and Lando Calrissian.
Click to expand...

Valid points. Great characters. I just think for this world and the people in it who are so connected to the network, to each other, a true bad apple would have no place. Plus the audience has come to expect the obligatory bad guy and believe me, we were all waiting for Tsu'Tey to turn on Jake... Just glad that for once in all of the movies I've seen, Tsu'Tey was able to make the rational choice and not be the bad guy. Kinda refreshing if you know what I mean.

And Tsu'Tey wasn't all good. He was a definitely flawed character...
 
I did not think he would turn on Jake for a second. I felt the story was very by-the-numbers and I knew he would turn out to be his buddy in the end. There was just simply no set up for that in my opinion. And if that happened it would felt odd to me.

Sidenote: some more mating would have been good though.:shocked:
 
Dances with Wolves in space where the white man gets defeated by the indians.

The end.

The film was easily an hour to long, and they didnt get into enough character development into the tribe as they could have. I mean they borrowed everything else from dances with wolves, so why not take more of what worked?

Pretty to look at, but at times unrealistic looking to. (why did every animal have a smooth shinny skin like a seal or a tree frog?)

I expected more.
 
Richard J. Johnson said:
I did not think he would turn on Jake for a second. I felt the story was very by-the-numbers and I knew he would turn out to be his buddy in the end. There was just simply no set up for that in my opinion. And if that happened it would felt odd to me.
Click to expand...

That's the thing: if you go by the numbers, he HAS to betray him or befriend him. He never LIKED Jake but in the end respected him because Jake dared to do the thing he himself would never have considered to be an option.
 
tmnt said:
Hey sad max finally an avatar change. How long's it been?
Click to expand...

Four years, nine months.

Rodney V. Smith said:
And Tsu'Tey wasn't all good. He was a definitely flawed character...
Click to expand...

Prideful and impulsive, for sure.

Battuta said:
Yeah, I'm just saying even something as black and white about the concept of evil as the Star Wars saga threw in characters like Han Solo and Lando Calrissian. All the characters line up too cleanly on one side of the line or the other in Avatar.
Click to expand...

I think that structurally it's tough to find a place for a Han Solo or a Lando Calrissian sort, in Avatar. Part of what makes them work is that they are independent operators: they cheerfully screw with the Empire for their own purposes so far as they can get away with it. They'll deal with who's in front of them to make the best deal for themselves. But they can choose to throw in with the good guys rather than mind their own business and keep on operating.

Nobody in Avatar has that choice. Jake's honor-bound. And the remaining humans and Na'vi are fighting for their respective lives; nobody has the luxury of lying low and dealing with whoever comes out on top.

Where I find moral ambiguity in the story is in the rationales by which the characters are driven, to perform their heroic or horrific actions.
 
Last edited:
Re: the predictability and lack of tension
Jim Klatt said:
+1
Click to expand...

+2

This was my largest problem. As much as I did enjoy the movie, what could it have been like had the story been surprising, unpredictable, etc.? Can you imagine those war sequences with some serious tension/surprise? The possibilities are insane... Most people are judging the film based on the spectacle and gorgeous look of the film. Those are some amazing brownie points for the film, no arguments there, but by no means does it make it my favorite film ever or something I would consider Best Picture worthy like some buzz that's started.
 
I don't personally see Best Picture. I see lots and lots of little golden men with other labels, but I don't think I see Best Picture.
 
Sad Max said:
Where I find moral ambiguity in the story is in the rationales by which the characters are driven, to perform their heroic or horrific actions.
Click to expand...

I do wish that the main dude would have fallen in love earlier. When he wakes up in the pod and says: "What are you doing, Jake?" was the beginning of what could have been such a meaty thread. But it was so late in the game, there was no time left to let it play out.

And I would've loved to see more struggle in him overall between the two worlds and his choice.
 
Watched it in 3D last night. Was extremely dissapointed with the visual quality as were others in the theater. Dark and fuzzy. Am going back to see it in 2D.
 
Jackson Miller said:
Hey so who saw this in 2d? I am going again with my friends and I am trying to decide if I should convince them to go to the 3d showing or not. Did you people who saw it in 2d still enjoy it a lot?
Click to expand...

I saw it in 2D and loved it; considering going to see it again (in 2D, there's no 3D theater in this town :crybaby:) tonight though. - Which would be the first time I've ever seen a movie twice in the theater.

How has it been the 2nd time for those of you who saw it again? Does it still feel the same, or is something lost in the 2nd viewing?

- Mikko
 
mikkowilson said:
How has it been the 2nd time for those of you who saw it again? Does it still feel the same, or is something lost in the 2nd viewing?
Click to expand...

I've seen it 3 times so far (in 3D each time). It was just as awesome the 2nd and 3rd times as it was the 1st. The only thing is you will know all the plot points and how it ends, but the experience was still freaking amazing.
 
Mark Williams said:
Watched it in 3D last night. Was extremely dissapointed with the visual quality as were others in the theater. Dark and fuzzy. Am going back to see it in 2D.
Click to expand...


Maybe you should try another 3d theater, My cousin that went with me yesterday to see it had seen it in 2d before but he said that 3d added something, and I can assure you that the 3d version I saw yesterday wasn't dark and fuzzy. So maybe is the theater.
 
I think one of the things that made it difficult to have fear of a "worse outcome" in the movie, was because we where, for 90% of the movie, on BOTH sides. Just as for Jake, we the audience were never in a situation where it was "us versus them". It was hard to find an outcome to be scared of for a period in the movie.

From a plot details point of view; I was immensely disappointed in the lack of any real attempt by any humans (including Jake) to actually negotiate with, or even tell the Navi why the humans where there. Even his "last ditch" effort to get them to leave peacefully was simply "you have to leave", not even an ounce of respect at that late stage for the Navi's need to know why.

- Mikko
 
mikkowilson said:
I think one of the things that made it difficult to have fear of a "worse outcome" in the movie, was because we where, for 90% of the movie, on BOTH sides. Just as for Jake, we the audience were never in a situation where it was "us versus them". It was hard to find an outcome to be scared of for a period in the movie.

From a plot details point of view; I was immensely disappointed in the lack of any real attempt by any humans (including Jake) to actually negotiate with, or even tell the Navi why the humans where there. Even his "last ditch" effort to get them to leave peacefully was simply "you have to leave", not even an ounce of respect at that late stage for the Navi's need to know why.

- Mikko
Click to expand...


Maybe they tried explaining it before (because when we arrive to the planet it's clear that they had already been negotiating before. But I suppose that that mineral is too important for the navi to let the humans take it. So anyway, which will be the outcome of telling them why they have to leave (seeing it from the bad guys side)?
 
Sad Max said:
I think that structurally it's tough to find a place for a Han Solo or a Lando Calrissian sort, in Avatar. Part of what makes them work is that they are independent operators: they cheerfully screw with the Empire for their own purposes so far as they can get away with it. They'll deal with who's in front of them to make the best deal for themselves. But they can choose to throw in with the good guys rather than mind their own business and keep on operating.

Nobody in Avatar has that choice. Jake's honor-bound. And the remaining humans and Na'vi are fighting for their respective lives; nobody has the luxury of lying low and dealing with whoever comes out on top.

Where I find moral ambiguity in the story is in the rationales by which the characters are driven, to perform their heroic or horrific actions.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to hold up the Star Wars example as one that Avatar should of followed, just as an illustration of how adding other dimensions can enrich a story. I think the problems some people are having with Avatar's story is not just that it recycles a well worn story, but that it doesn't add enough new wrinkles to it. One could argue that District 9 tells a similar story, but it shakes up the formula so much that people don't notice.
 
Mark Williams said:
Watched it in 3D last night. Was extremely dissapointed with the visual quality as were others in the theater. Dark and fuzzy.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a problem with that individual theater. I saw it in real 3D on a pretty big screen and it looked great. Are you sure you had your glasses on?
 
ilauzirika said:
Maybe they tried explaining it before (because when we arrive to the planet it's clear that they had already been negotiating before. But I suppose that that mineral is too important for the navi to let the humans take it. So anyway, which will be the outcome of telling them why they have to leave (seeing it from the bad guys side)?
Click to expand...

But again, in balance, we (the viewer) never heard why the Navi wouldn't give up the mineral? Other than a blanket statement (by the humans no less) that the area is sacred, the Navi never gave (or where given the chance?) to state their case.


Overall I just think that the "negotiations" where very weak from all sides. But then again, that may have very well been the point.

- Mikko
 
mikkowilson said:
But again, in balance, we (the viewer) never heard why the Navi wouldn't give up the mineral? Other than a blanket statement (by the humans no less) that the area is sacred, the Navi never gave (or where given the chance?) to state their case.


Overall I just think that the "negotiations" where very weak from all sides. But then again, that may have very well been the point.

- Mikko
Click to expand...


Possible spoilers..

Totally agree on that,
and you may have a point in that last sentence. Maybe they just wanted to show us that from the first moment the attack was planed, that no infiltrated agent would be able to stop any invasion from happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top