Avatar

[Rum]

I've got no intention of analysing or reviewing it!

Haha ... oh well you could give us a little bit.. what did you think of the effects? did you see it in 3D? Did you get a tear in your eye at any point?

Oh all right, since you asked so nicely...

Yes 3D. Superb effects - a visual feast! If you've not seen it just go.

Blood/stone - come to mind.

Personally as time has gone on (I saw it about a month ago) I find myself less impressed. The characterisation is poor right through the movie and that lingers.

It is comparing chalk and cheese no doubt, but I went to see Up in the Air yesterday. What a stunning movie. One of the very best I have ever seen and not a special effect in sight.

[Thinking Aloud]

I've got no intention of analysing or reviewing it!

Haha ... oh well you could give us a little bit.. what did you think of the effects? did you see it in 3D? Did you get a tear in your eye at any point?

Oh all right, since you asked so nicely...

Yes 3D. Superb effects - a visual feast! If you've not seen it just go.

Blood/stone - come to mind.

Personally as time has gone on (I saw it about a month ago) I find myself less impressed. The characterisation is poor right through the movie and that lingers.

It is comparing chalk and cheese no doubt, but I went to see Up in the Air yesterday. What a stunning movie. One of the very best I have ever seen and not a special effect in sight.

But then Avatar is clearly about the effects. It's a spectacle and is worth seeing just for that.

[Rum]

But then Avatar is clearly about the effects. It's a spectacle and is worth seeing just for that.

I am sure you are right - thus the 'chalk and cheese' analogy. Avatar is more of a roller coaster ride than anything in its way! Don't get me wrong - I enjoyed it thoroughly.

[Elessarina]

Yes 3D. Superb effects - a visual feast! If you've not seen it just go.

I assume you didn't mean me? I saw it on the 17th December!

[Thinking Aloud]

Yes 3D. Superb effects - a visual feast! If you've not seen it just go.

I assume you didn't mean me? I saw it on the 17th December!

It was a general recommendation to anyone who hasn't.

[leo-rcc]

To quote Martin Wagner:

So. 'Avatar' wins Golden Globe for Best Picture Drama? Over 'The Hurt Locker' and 'Inglourious Basterds'? Was story optional this year? Should Cameron share his prize with Kevin Costner and the 'Pocahontas' animators?

[Elessarina]

To quote Martin Wagner:

So. 'Avatar' wins Golden Globe for Best Picture Drama? Over 'The Hurt Locker' and 'Inglourious Basterds'? Was story optional this year? Should Cameron share his prize with Kevin Costner and the 'Pocahontas' animators?

And every other writer share their award with Shakespeare..

Standing on the shoulders of giants..

[Chinaski]

One thing is standing on the shoulders of giants. Another is presenting the exact same thing as one's own.

[Elessarina]

One thing is standing on the shoulders of giants. Another is presenting the exact same thing as one's own.

It is not the exact same thing though.

[Elessarina]

One thing is standing on the shoulders of giants. Another is presenting the exact same thing as one's own.

Actually I am curious as to what YOU think it is an exact copy of...

[Trolldor]

To quote Martin Wagner:

So. 'Avatar' wins Golden Globe for Best Picture Drama? Over 'The Hurt Locker' and 'Inglourious Basterds'? Was story optional this year? Should Cameron share his prize with Kevin Costner and the 'Pocahontas' animators?

And every other writer share their award with Shakespeare..

Standing on the shoulders of giants..

Shakespeare should share his awards with the guys he ripped off then.
Difference is I've read the originals as well as his 'new' versions, and his were better.
Avatar's story or characterisiation was not better than any of its predecessors, it was either the same or inferior to.

[Elessarina]

Avatar's story or characterisiation was not better than any of its predecessors, it was either the same or inferior to.

Why does it have to be? It's not trying to be anything other than Avatar.. and I am more interested in the story being told set on an alien world with awesome special effects than deep characterisation and the Na'vi just being actors painted blue with pointy ears. If I want a great character driven piece I'll go to David Mamet

[Animavore]

Looks like South Park already done this. Although this episode was released before Avatar came out and is more a piss-take on Glenn Beck.

http://www.ninjavideo.net/video/47854

[Trolldor]

Avatar's story or characterisiation was not better than any of its predecessors, it was either the same or inferior to.

Why does it have to be? It's not trying to be anything other than Avatar.. and I am more interested in the story being told set on an alien world with awesome special effects than deep characterisation and the Na'vi just being actors painted blue with pointy ears. If I want a great character driven piece I'll go to David Mamet

Then you accept the movie is only 'pretty effects', and that leaves me wondering why you're defending it so vehemently.

[Elessarina]

Then you accept the movie is only 'pretty effects', and that leaves me wondering why you're defending it so vehemently.

No I don't accept it's just "pretty effects" at all. And neither do critics, the public or the awards bodies. Just because a movie isn't Schindler's List doesn't mean its story is crap. An ex-marine is recruited into the Avatar programme.. mixes with the natives and sides with them to fight against the humans.. what is so wrong with that story?