Avatar

[Samprimary]

Yeah, just saw it again.

I realized after my first viewing that there was little point in working hard to pick apart the movie's pacing and character shortcomings, because there's a limit to which this serves a point. avatar is self-explanatory as an experience. it is the quintessence of blockbuster entertainment. it's just neat. there is no need to pick apart flaws because it is so far beyond the threshold of succeeding as a wicked fun thing to go see.

[Samprimary]

addendum, though: that doesn't mean that you're being stupid for not liking it. We all have our own quirks involving what 'pulls us out of a movie,' and Avatar is a minefield of things that really, really fucking annoy some viewer typologies. Sticklers for real physics will scoff on contact with floating rocks with waterfalls, etc.

[Tannhauser]

I drove 3hrs round trip to catch this in 3D.  Like others, I had trouble focusing in some scenes but overall I thought it was visually stunning.  Did they explain why Earth needed unobtanium in the movie?  They just said omg Earth's dying.  If humanity has the tech to fly to another planet couldn't they make drilling machines to bore under the sacred lands and mine from below?  Keeps the natives from shooting you as well.  But it's not a movie to nitpick too much, it's a popcorn flick of extraordinary magnitude.  Plus it had that hispanic chick in her t-shirt in 3D.  Fucking win.

Unfortunately, my enjoyment was constantly disrupted by the MUTHERFUCKER behind me who couldn't stop sniffling.  I mean every fucking breath was a sniffle.  There were three year olds in there who didn't say a peep but this guy couldn't stop snuffling.  I gave him the stinkeye twice and he seemed to ease  off, but Jesus, if you're that sick stay in bed.  Or blow your goddamn nose.  Why do all the fucks sit behind me?  It just kept jerking me out of the movie, I wish the sound had been in THX and blown my fucking ears out instead.

[RhyssaFireheart]

I'd wanted to see this movie anyways, but when I found out tonight that my 66 year old mom's been to see it (she took my niece and nephew to the show) - now I've got to go.  She even said she enjoyed it a lot.  That's kind of freaky though.

[trias_e]

It's like "Sin City" - something that looks great the first time you see it, then on every re-watching you realise exactly how dumb some of it is. Go and watch "Avatar" again. See it when the spectacle (and I love spectacle) has worn off and you are actually trying to be interested in the characters or the plot. If it was shorter, I might have been more swept away, but it runs long and I just wanted it to get to Colonel vs King Blue Elf at the end so we could wrap it up.

Comparing Avatar to Sin City?  Really?  The fuck.

For myself, Avatar was atrocious on first watch, and Sin City was still fantastic after multiple viewing.  The primary reason being, I think, that Avatar doesn't seem to know it's cliched and hamfisted, wheras Sin City certainly did and operates in constant joy of that fact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-SVpZrnF34&feature=player_embedded

[Tannhauser]

You thought Avatar was atrocious.  Really.  OK I can see differences of opinion on the story or script or acting, etc. but if you thought the visuals were atrocious I think you're just being trendy by hating on the new cool.

[trias_e]

I didn't think the visuals were atrocious, of course not, but I don't see how they can carry a movie with that much suckitude in every other area.  If the movie focused primarily on it's visuals as it's raison détre, then it could be interesting, but as is they're like the candy shell of an m and m...except there's crap inside instead of chocolate.

[lamaros]

Sin City is worse than Avater in almost every way. :)

[WindupAtheist]

Sin City sucked. I was on board until the end, then Bruce Willis had to kill himself to escape the infinite power of... a US senator? Dude just leave the country.

[Merusk]

You missed the subtext that it's better to off yourself than to be forced to live in some other, lesser, country, WUA!

[WindupAtheist]

Anyway, second weekend Friday take is estimated at about $23 million, which is practically the same as their first weekend Friday take. The dropoff is going to be tiny-to-nonexistant and Cameron can pretty much tell everyone in Hollywood to bow down and lick his balls.

[Ratman_tf]

Anyway, second weekend Friday take is estimated at about $23 million, which is practically the same as their first weekend Friday take. The dropoff is going to be tiny-to-nonexistant and Cameron can pretty much tell everyone in Hollywood to bow down and lick his balls.

Again?

[Lakov_Sanite]

Hell, even with all the negative stuff im still going to go see it in the imax next week just for the sheer eye candy aspect. Original plot or not I'm sure a lot of people feel the same.  

[Abagadro]

Anyway, second weekend Friday take is estimated at about $23 million, which is practically the same as their first weekend Friday take. The dropoff is going to be tiny-to-nonexistant and Cameron can pretty much tell everyone in Hollywood to bow down and lick his balls.

Yup. 2.9 percent second weekend drop. Helps that it was a holiday weekend but it beat a much-hyped opening of Sherlock Holmes. 600M worldwide after 9 days.  Be surprising if it doesn't eclipse 1B.

[WindupAtheist]

My questions now are...

1) Can Cameron claim the top two spots on the all-time domestic box office chart by beating Dark Knight's $533 million?
2) Can he claim the top two on the all-time worldwide chart by beating Return of the King's $1.1 billion?
3) Can Avatar threaten Titanic's $600 million domestic or $1.8 billion worldwide records?

And my gut feelings are...

1) Quite possibly
2) Almost certainly
3) Nah, it might get close domestically, but Titanic's worldwide gross is unassailable.

[naum]

Caught a 3-D showing (IMAX 11p sold out) last night, thoroughly entertaining flick, plot cheesy and characters one-dimensional but as others have pointed out, not a movie with merit based on plot and story, but you got to see it.

Best 3D movie ever (at least of the few I've seen, previous one I took in was Up).

Liked this review by Richard Bartle that summed up my thoughts on my move very nicely…

[Murgos]

The visuals were great. The story was like shaving my brain with a saftey razor.

[UnSub]

My friend made the point that the VTOL craft look a lot like the ones in the Terminator films. The mechs were a bit underdone though (well detailed, just under-realised).

[Murgos]

What? You don't think a heavy combat vehicle in close terrain should have a glass bubble for a canopy?  I can't think why not.

[Mrbloodworth]

How do you know it's glass? Could have been transparent aluminum.

[Draegan]

I saw this on Saturday in 3D.  Imax was sold out so I saw it on a regular screen in 3D.

I sat in the third row from the front, terrible angle.  There were edges of the screen that I could see outside the edges of my 3D glasses.

That being said, this movie was fantastic.  I don't care about the plot or the characters, though I liked them both.  The movie was stunning and I was dragged into the world because of the effects. 

All you people hating on the movie are fucking tarts and don't know how to have fun.

Yes the plot was simple.  So what.  Yes you saw the ending coming a mile away, so what.  Yes the characters were simple, but they were well done enough that I could care about them.

I loved this movie and I will be seeing it again in IMAX after the holidays.  Best popcorn/action flick of this decade, or at least top 5. 

[Teleku]

What? You don't think a heavy combat vehicle in close terrain should have a glass bubble for a canopy?  I can't think why not.

Oh, lets not start that thread again.

[Numtini]

I thought the movie was fantastic as well. Very very well crafted adventure picture. Well worth the 5 hour round trip to see it in imax 3d. (2d only on Cape Cod.)

[Teleku]

As somebody who wears glasses, how would the movie be if I tried to go see it in 3D?  Would I be able to fit the 3D glasses over my glasses without much trouble?  Anybody have any experience (don't have the time to go back and read the thread right now to see if this has already been answered)?

[Draegan]

I saw it with my dad who wears glasses in a Real-D or whatever the AMC theater was.  The glasses fit over his just fine and he didn't complain about headaches or any adverse affects.  However I've read that if you can wear contacts, wear those instead.  I would imagine though it really depends on the theater.

[naum]

As somebody who wears glasses, how would the movie be if I tried to go see it in 3D?  Would I be able to fit the 3D glasses over my glasses without much trouble?  Anybody have any experience (don't have the time to go back and read the thread right now to see if this has already been answered)?

I had glasses on with the 3D glasses over top — worked just fine, though I did experience a slight nech-ache/headache due more to being near the front in a packed theater…

[Riggswolfe]

As somebody who wears glasses, how would the movie be if I tried to go see it in 3D?  Would I be able to fit the 3D glasses over my glasses without much trouble?  Anybody have any experience (don't have the time to go back and read the thread right now to see if this has already been answered)?

In my theater the 3d glasses were big. They looked like large versions of those sunglasses Jackie Kennedy used to wear and they fit over my glasses just fine.

[UnSub]

What? You don't think a heavy combat vehicle in close terrain should have a glass bubble for a canopy?  I can't think why not.

Oh, lets not start that thread again.

Not even that part of the design - just the fact the mechs carried a single bigger gun (and a knife  ). They really should have been weapon platforms, glass canopy or not.

All you people hating on the movie are fucking tarts and don't know how to have fun.

Yes the plot was simple.  So what.  Yes you saw the ending coming a mile away, so what.  Yes the characters were simple, but they were well done enough that I could care about them.

"Avatar" is the blockbuster film that is generally hated - all style, no substance - but here the style is so high that for a lot of people it seems to overcome the lack of substance. Personally I don't get it (the only time the characters have any dimension to them is when you wear the special glasses). James Cameron probably isn't weeping any tears over that, however.

[Khaldun]

I'm in the "visuals are game-changing, plot was already bad about ten re-tellings ago" camp. But The Jazz Singer is also not a very good film and yet a revolutionary one at the same time, for much the same reason.

I did have a side-geek objection to Pandora itself that was quite aside from my irritation with the Dances-With-Wolves retread plot. The visualization of it was spectacular, but the conceptualization didn't really add up--and it might have helped the movie a bit in the plot department if it had. Consider two questions: why does a planet where all life is symbiotically linked appear to have organisms whose relationship is apparently the same as Earth's ecosystems, with competition for resources, predator-prey relationships and so on? And why are there multiple bands or groups of Na'vi who do not automatically react to changing circumstances with one will but require a prophet-like figure to unite them? (Who previously appeared, we're told, in a "time of troubles" that vaguely seems to hint of warfare or conflict between the Na'vi?)

It's not even clear why a planet which reacts as a single lifeform, which is a literal Gaia, would have diverse lifeforms at all.

Unless: the neural linkages between lifeforms, coordinated through the trees, are a late evolutionary development in the history of the planet, a competing form of intelligence which appeared after the Na'vi achieved sentience and became toolusers. E.g., that in the past, the planet was pretty much the same in its development as Earth. And maybe the world-mind wasn't entirely benign in its initial relationship to other lifeforms, but instead actively colonized their bodies with parasites/symbiotes that linked them into the tree network whether they wanted to be or not.

Why this might have helped the film is this: 1) it's a way to make the Na'vi less one-dimensionally goody-goody and noble and 2) it's a way to make the choice that Jake Sully makes a bit more complex and odd, e.g., he's allowing a semi-parasitical and very alien lifeform to infiltrate his consciousness, with some suggestion that the world-mind may actually suborn or subvert the will of other lifeforms on the planet when it wants to. As it is, why *not* be a Na'vi? Physically more robust, has working legs, he's got a lover who is politically well-connected, the culture suits his personality pretty well, etc.

[Nevermore]

I made two assumptions that explained away what otherwise would have been some pretty significant logical inconsistencies:

1)   Pandora was likely bio-engineered by some dead alien civilization long ago.  The ecosystem of the planet was pretty neat and all but I find it highly unlikely it could have evolved that way on its own.  But having an ancient bio-computer as the starting point of the evolution of the moon makes a bit more sense.

2)   It seemed very obvious to me that the human presence on the planet wasn’t military but was just some mining company with some mercs hired on the cheap.  I’m pretty sure they even said as much in the movie.  Did those mechs even have integrated weapons?  They were probably just adapted from some kind of civilian utility mechs because either the company didn’t want to pay for or didn’t have access to real military grade stuff, having blown their budget on all those helicopter things.
     If it were a real military operation bent on a territorial grab then the natives would have been wiped out in short order.  But the company hired a bunch of for-hire clowns for security and/or 'relocating' the natives so they could get at their magic rocks, lead by Bozo the Head Clown who likely was mustered out of the military for being incompetent.  I find that reasonably believable given the likely expense of moving all the people and equipment to the planet and the typical cost-cutting corporations like to engage in.

That said, the plot was still pretty simplistic but it didn't really need to be overly complex to be an enjoyable movie.  I thought seeing the movie was money well spent, which is more than I can say about the vast majority of movies these days.

[Aez]

It's a mass market movie.  I don't know the percentage of population with enough basic biology knowledge to understand Khaldun's point but it must be pretty low.

[Nevermore]

Also, all the native animal life on Pandora has six limbs and four eyes, except the Night Elves.  It seems almost certain there was some engineering going on in the past there.

[Aez]

Yep, they were all bio engineered in Maya 

The everyone as 6 legs, 4 eyes and chest noses except the blue guys bothered me. Seems like the kind of decision you take to ensure people relate to the heroes.

[Draegan]

Or maybe they didn't have all those legs because it was a fucking movie.

[gryeyes]

One of the creatures has two limbs that are fusing together (they also look like monkeys).