ya its the one animal we all secretly want as a pet because we all now that it will pawn everything on earth. give it a rebreather harness and good bye earth predators. At its the ultimate kitty of kittyness. As for Turok our red dragon (we got open their dimension) will fry the beasty.
btw, terra nova is the plot of avatar and jurassic park, with the human drama of lost and csi, not a hint of originality, still a good show tho... sometimes
Usul573, it is pointless, but it makes me feel better about what Lucas has done to Star Wars. I'm well within my rights to complain when some asshole takes it upon themselves to ruin everything I loved as a child. As many have said before, George Lucas raped my childhood.
But, James Cameron here, has sufficiently made up for that fat asshole, Lucas's mistakes.
@OffDWallNotDRack all the big animals on pandora have carbonfiber-armoured skin, so most of them are extremely hard to kill. however, the thanotor's weak spot is it's belly, as quaritch quickly figured out.
AVATAR has pushed CGI to the next level. I want to tell something, no matter how hard they do there is something lacking because its not real. I have researched on CGI for all most 3 yrs what i found was u cant cheat real world. CGI is still in its infancy even now after avatar. There still lots to be done to make it look real. Maybe in next 100 yrs it may become possible.
It's very Ironic that it sounds like a Jurassic park T-Rex and that James Cameron describes it as a "panther from hell" that would "eat a T-Rex and have the Alien for desert" LOL XD luv dat quote
With one or two shots, Cameron makes George Lucas look like the hack he is. I mean, just look at the craftsmanship here and then, take a look at the Star Wars prequels or Indiana Jones 4, for Christs sake.
And man, the plot complaints for this are so lazy and shallow. People compare if to DWW (parallels are def there) but that movie is 20 years old. I mean are these people watching that movie over and over? Odds are most haven't even seen it. This is a classic story that deservedly gets updated from time to time, this one having a sci-fi spin on it. Every other month we get superhero movies that follow the exact same formula, yet no one bitches about that? People are hypocrites.
i agree. actually I read somewhere that in literature studies, someone even counted all possible themes/plots of all books/stories and they are like under 10-20, they are just set in different times/locations/have different details aroudn them
With so much visual creativity and originality, it is strange that some of the creature sounds are from JP. Honestly though I've come to see it as a homage to one of the great CGI/monster flicks. To those who complain it's not alien enough, your missing the point. Pandora serves as a heightened and enhanced version of our earth, it is very symbolic of the things we've done to our own planet.
so everyones gonna hate this movie because the animals sound like dinosaurs and no one can really grasp the story concept? wut do you want them to sound like? ducks?
I can't take this Thanator creature seriously because the sounds are from the T-Rex from Jurassic Park. I'd be so offended if i was Spielberg. Jurassic Park sounds are original and should be left alone! Also at 1:44 it sounds like King Kong from back in 70's .... smh
@luigimon25 who the fuck cares? the t-rex roars for instance has been used everywhere that involves dinosaurs since JP came out, and people go nerdraging when it's applied to an alien cat? That's just nerdy horseshit. I'm surprised nobody complained when the lion-roar was applied to the predators in AvP, or when the bantha-roar from star wars was applied to most of the herbivorous dinosaurs in lost world.
Excellent movie, really proved motion capture animation can be perfected like LOTR or King Kong by PJ. Sure Cameron borrowed from Last of the Mohicans, Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind (aka Warriors of the Wind), Ferngully, Willow, Dances with Wolves, Broken Arrow (1950), Forte Apache, The Searchers, Dune, Heavy Metal, Starchaser Legend of Orin, Princess Mononoke, Castle in The Sky (Laputa), Pom Poko, Star Wars, Star Trek 6 and Fantastic Planet but it was a great time.
LOL. Add fuel to the fire, asshole. Let's also say that Cameron took from Platoon, Saving Private Ryan, Apocalypse Now... LOL. Jesus, you've listed every great film that features Native Americans. LOL. You don't think this is a tad bit ridiculous??
These creatures plus the jungles look like something out of Heavy Metal magazine, anyone noticed that? Cameron is a fan of HM Magazine aka Metal Hurlant and used it as one of his inspirations
Actually, I can't really see why Avatar has an "unoriginal" plot. People say it is, but...the only thing they ever compare it to is two movies. And that's all?
The Thanator is able to take down one of those Hammerhead Rhinos. Those critters are built to survive any kind of abuse you can think of. Their armor is extraordinarily thick. So, I would imagine the Thanator is pretty hard to take down.
Gunfire doesn't work. But, obviously, a knife or a spear in the right place, might be able to bring down this king of the Pandora jungles. lol.
I've seen this before watching the movie but when I saw this in cinema I sh*ted in my pants. Most of all when the Thanator screamed and jumped on Jake.
@scagish Dude, even Quaritch had a hard time beating it, with a freakin AMP suit!!!! So, Jake standing against would look like a cat going against a lion. haha, easy lunch.
Titanic and Avatar are simply being trashed, because of the hype, because they are so successful. If you loved either film, don't let anyone else shake that opinion. Watch Avatar or Titanic with pride. Not one filmmaker in the history of film has been able to accomplish what James Cameron has accomplished. He is freakin' extraordinary. An alien of film-making. He is THAT good.
That's a different kind of awful. I've seen The Room. I've seen Troll 2. I've seen Plan 9 from Outer Space. And I think that they're hilarious.
But Avatar? Not only is it a big-budget movie to be judged by big-budget standards, it's a movie with an undeservedly high reputation. It's a movie with legions of fans and positive reviews, which wouldn't have a tenth as many without the magic of CGI and emotional manipulation. It's a movie that I simply can't stand.
Well you are entitled to your opinion. But with worldwide sales already past the billion dollar mark and still climbing, it appears you are among the very few who did not like this quite beautifully filmed and adventure filled sci fi movie by James Cameron. Can you be more specific about your dislikes of this movie? Like what scenes or dialogues and so forth where you decided you hate this wonderfully written sci fi adventure film.
First of all, sales mean nothing. The Da Vinci Code was a best-seller. Twilight continues to be massively popular as a book and film series. Neither, and I'm sure that you'll agree, is especially good in any way.
Second, a movie can be both bad and well-directed. David Fincher's cinematography in Alien³ was nothing short of brilliant, but the movie itself is mediocre at best, even in its extended cut.
I'm running out of characters here, so I'll continue in another comment.
Third, I never "decided" to hate Avatar, any more than I "decided" to like Terminator. I hate Avatar; I like Terminator.
Now, about Avatar itself.
It's absolutely loaded with plagiarism and clichés. I'm not talking about the plot, as that's irrelevant - it doesn't matter how old a story is as long as you tell it right. I'm talking about everything else.
The "new world" that James Cameron pretends to have invented is absurdly derivative. Pandora is literally a collection of Roger Dean paintings rendered in 3D - the floating mountains, the loops of stone, the coastline's lighting and rock formations, the flat-topped trees of the plains, the hypersaturated green of the jungle itself. All of these elements can be found in Dean's artwork going back to the '70s, and they're reproduced in Avatar with VERY little stylistic deviation.
The creatures that populate Pandora show similar unoriginality, being simple alterations to existing Earth animals, such as horses, dogs, and monkeys. Occasionally, animals will be combined, such as the hybrid of rhinoceros and hammerhead shark seen in this clip. Even the stylization that the animals exhibit is of a sort often seen in fantasy art, such as that of Rodney Matthews. Matthews and Dean are well-known artists, and it would be silly to ascribe this to coincidence.
Finally, the Na'vi themselves are disgustingly generic pastiches of every "native" stereotype and cliché imaginable, set up to embody the long-discredited "noble savage" stereotype as a foil against the eeeeevil White Man. Their pantheistic religion (expressed, of course, in communal chanting and dancing), their arrows and war paint, their language's derivation from those spoken in West Africa (something in which Cameron seems to take pride) are all marks of extreme laziness.
But enough about Pandora. Let's talk about the people, shall we?
Avatar's "characters" are cardboard cutouts, clichés who would have been right at home in the B-movies of the '50s, with precious little to develop them as individuals. Sully is as boringly heroic as protagonists come; Augustine is the thoughtful, right-minded scientist against Quaritch's Viet Nam-era saber-rattling (and I mean that it was a cliché even back then); all are intensely unimaginative.
The Na'vi characters are even more stereotypical than their human counterparts. Each can be described, in entirety, in two words:
Tsu'tey - Brave warrior
Eytucan - Tribal chief
Mo'at - Witch doctor
Neytiri - Native princess
These are archetypes that would be considered racist in their simplicity in any other film. But, because Avatar is such a tree-hugger of a movie, people actually accept them as far more than the pathetic sketches that they are.
Finally, to round out this charming picture, each culture itself is entirely devoted to one side of the black-and-white division of morality that constitutes the film's central conflict. The humans are unambiguously Bad, making half-hearted shows of diplomacy in an attempt to placate the natives while indulging in every Captain Planet-level example of environmental destruction at their disposal, calling them "savages" at every turn as if they're from the 19th century.
On the extreme opposite end of the spectrum lie the Na'vi. Living as much "in harmony with nature" as is physically possible (yet another way in which the movie appeals to fiction rather than fact in its depiction of indigenes), they're as pure as the driven snow, simultaneously as brave-hearted as any warrior archetype could hope to be and spiritually "sensitive" enough to hold funerals for animals killed in self-defense. The caricature couldn't be any more transparent.
We now come to the "epic" final conflict, a showdown between Good and Evil to allegedly rival those in such cultural touchstones as Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings. One one side are the peaceful natives, driven to the brink of war by an invading force; on the other, a legion of imperialistic nature-rapists who won't let little things like cultural genocide get betwen them and that sweet, sweet profit margin. It's a fight between Right and Wrong, between Us and Them.
How ironic, then, that it's all started by the supposed "hero"'s complete lack of competence. For someone who was sent to Pandora entirely for the purpose of reaching a mutual agreement between the humans and Na'vi, he spends an awful lot of time doing exactly nothing to achieve that. When tensions finally boil over, it's because he made no attempt to prevent it, preferring to date Neytiri instead of negotiate with her father - the latter of which being his actual job there.
And, now, the battle itself. Given that it's the last resort after a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make peace, that it's the culmination of large-scale distrust and incrementally growing hostility on both sides, you'd expect it to be a tragedy, perhaps an opportunity for the movie to espouse another traditionally liberal message: that war is unequivocally Bad. Sadly, it's the biggest glorification of war that I've seen on-screen, and unquestionably the biggest post-Viet Nam.
The humans are the bad guys here, not because they're bad, but because they're human. When Quaritch accuses Sully of betraying his "own race", we're meant to disagree with him, to think that he's being racist himself. In fact, Sully should be having a huge internal conflict of loyalty here. He should kill because he finally HAS to, because he has no other choice. He should be torn between his humanity and the Na'vi's need for assistance.
But, no, he's finally Seen The Light and realized that humans are the bad guys after all. And the movie evidently wants the audience to believe that, too, as it lovingly cuts to such ostensibly horrifying scenes as a man being smashed between two cube-shaped bombs, a man screaming in terror as he's crushed to pulp under the foot of a massive beast, or a man shredded by the blades of a helicopter, while dramatic, triumphant music swells on the soundtrack.
In contrast to that, we have every Na'vi death enshrined in slow-motion, accompanied by melancholy (and very "native"-sounding) wails of sadness. Even a bullet to the arm gets this treatment. So, what's the movie trying to say here? That it's OK for people to die horribly if they were fighting for the wrong side? I have assume that every human soldier was as morally rotten as Selfridge and Quaritch because they were subordinate to them. What? How does that make sense?
In the end, Sully decides to leave that nasty old human body of his and take up permanent residence in a Na'vi body, in case we missed the point about humans being inherently evil and the Na'vi being inherently good. The other humans fly away, presumably for good (although it would make much more sense that, after a defeat like that, they'd come back with a full military garrison and simply wipe the Na'vi out, given their portrayal here), and everyone lives Happily Ever After.
My revulsion for its naked (and, sadly, largely successful, given its reception) attempts to pass of plagiarism as groundbreaking innovation, its pervasively stereotypical presentation of everything that it concerns, and its thoroughly disgusting morals aside (and, believe me, I could have written at least three times as much as I did on any of those subjects), I think that it's a decent enough film, at least on a technical level.
The rendering detail is second to one, and James Cameron's deft hand for action sequences is as well-employed here as it has ever been; the aforementioned battle sequence is at least choreographed brilliantly. There are plenty of visually striking shots, such as Jake's awakening from cryosleep, or the massive, hovering wedge of the Valkyrie shuttle. I might have even been able to grudgingly accept the film as an enjoyable one for those elements alone, had it been any other.
But I can't. I can't accept its Roger Dean scenery when James Cameron's trying to sell it as his own idea; I can't accept the cardboard characters when the marketing team and fanbase are exalting the film as a triumph of storytelling; I can't BEGIN to accept the heavy-handed and completely wrong-headed moralizing when the film is so self-righteous and pretends to have a Message That Makes You Think, as opposed to simply being a big, dumb action movie.
@oopaulorafael I can't agree more on that. Aliens was just... GENIUS, EPIC AND MANY OTHER GOOD THINGS. Terminator 2 is kick-ass. But after True Lies... he then made overrated films (of course, Titanic feeling like Gone with the Wind, which the latter should have better credit for being a lot more realistic.) And now, he's making sequels to Avatar, which is a ripoff of the stories of Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves (which are better than Avatar). WHEN WILL THIS END?!
@Aperrentis Right.... well, I'm aware of that. But for a film that sets in the future, we would expect this advanced civilization to be more technological than what we're going through right now. But nope. It uses old native american times to illustrate the future of this planet, Pandora. This is why the film feels like the old stories of Pocahontas. (I'm not referring to the Disney film because that, too, was based upon true stories of Pocahontas... with a few liberties.).
@Johnlindsey289 Well, in story, it's the weakest, but the Visual effects is what makes this film popular... but it's not Cameron's worst film. I prefer this more than Titanic.
Do you think this is James Cameron's worst film? do you think it deserves it's success as the number one movie or all time or is it the biggest fraud in film history? why do you think it's a success?
Fantastic. I'm considering buying a 3-D lcd just so I can re-visit this awesome planet. I'm not happy about missing the August re-release! I'd pay sixty bucks to see it again on the big screen but alas, that ain't likely to happen for a while. I'm glad I got to see it four times!
Amen...I love the haters alot of them saying flop, but Avatar broke every SWS and Lord of the rings film in two. :) Haters can be in denial all they want, but by the 3rd Avatar sequel it will blow away every movie franchise ever made. :)
The killings weren't too detailed, neither was the sex-scene, and the swearing isn't that extreme. They basically say "bullshit, "shit" and "dammit", but never "fuck", swear words that even kids today say. We used to see fighting and death in Disney and Don Bluth-films, remember??
@goldenbulletwolf666 That's pretty much what was going to happen, but they thought it would be too gory so they scratched that. James wanted the whole family to watch, so he couldn't put in gore.
@goldenbulletwolf666 I thought the same as well. But we do remember that when the na'vi and a beast connect their brains, the na'vi can give any command and the beast will obey. Apparently Neytiri have never encountered a guy in an AMP-suit before. On it's own, the Thanator would have killed Quaritch easily. A scene had to be deleted depicting the Thanotor tearing open the canopy of a guy's AMP-suit and eats him.
Do you think it has the right to be the highest grossing movie of all time? and just because it became a high money maker doesn't mean it's good right? do you think this will ever be as good as Cameron's Aliens and Terminator movies?
i know a bunch of fanboys are gonna hate me but this movie was not the greatest movie of all time, not even close, it wasnt bad but nowhere near the best, this movie is basically dancing with smurfs
@SmokiSounds Look up the definition of 'troll'. I can assure you it is not saying they like something, in this case a really, really damn good film. Troll is someone who needlessly and pointlessly insults people who disagree with them. aka, you
@thejoexman If this senseless, soulless visual eyecandy spectacle means "a damn good film" to you, well, congratulations, you deserve pity. Let alone sympathising a "best movie evarrrrr" troll.
@SmokiSounds There is plenty of soul behind this movie, but if you don't want to see that, fine. And if you don't want to accept the fact that some people may have different opinions than you and continue to look down upon them out of some misplaced sense of superiority just because you think bashing this film makes you 'innovative' and 'new-wave', then I pity you. Especially since you still don't understand wat makes a 'troll' (hint: you're the textbook definition)
@thejoexman lol, think I'm bashing it to be "different" from most? What you think, I'm 13 or something? Please. ALL this movie is, is a showcase of new emotion capture technology. Nothing more, nothing less. And so when I see a lame troll screaming "best movie EVARRR", I'm not going to respect that bullshit opinion.
The textbook definition of a troll is at the top of best rated comments. It's ok though.
@SmokiSounds Yes, you do happen to have the maturity of a 13-year old. And for your benefit, the definition of troll: a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response. Yes, saying Avatar is the best movie ever is TOTALLY inflammatory, not like saying you pity people who disagree with you. Bah
@SmokiSounds Oh, and as for your opinions on Avatar, yes the main purpose was to advance technology, but guess what? That/s exactly what EVERY sci-fi film has done, show off new technology. All have very familiar stories, fairly two-dimensional characters, and old-hat morals. At least in Avatar it bothered to explain stuff and make it seem like there was a point behind what was happening. There is not one sci-fi film that has not done exactly what Avatar did, just in a different way.
How can you say that with a straight face? Have you even SEEN a sci-fi movie besides Star Wars and its imitators? What about Blade Runner? Gattaca? The Wrath of Khan?
I might as well just list a few more good sci-fi movies here, since you have such a misguided opinion of the genre:
Moon
Serenity
Sunshine
Children of Men
Solaris
Watch those, then tell me that the sci-fi genre is a cheap excuse to throw special effects on the screen.
@StellarJetman I have seen dozens of sci-fi films, including the ones you listed. And you know what I noticed? Every single one of them had a story I had seen a dozen times before. Having an original story as you desire it just doesn't exist anymore. I defy you to name ONE sci-fi film that has a completely original concept that hasn't been done before. You claim (wrongly) that Avatar is 'plagarism'. It's not even the worst example of borrowed material.
@StellarJetman Right, because we've NEVER seen a society that separates the 'superior' beings from the inferior ones (Blade Runner) with a struggle between two brothers based on superiority (The Ten Commandments). Second, you seriously think Roger Dean was the first to ever think of floating islands? I've seen his painting; they don't look that similar. And where did Cameron say, "I came up with this. ME! No one else!"? And so you're only offended by the success. Kind of shallow, eh?
>Right, because we've NEVER seen a society that separates the 'superior' beings from the inferior ones (Blade Runner) with a struggle between two brothers based on superiority (The Ten Commandments).
So Blade Runner ripped off the Bible? Huh? And there was a LOT more to the replicants' situation than being "separated" from Earth.
@StellarJetman No, I said the two of them as separate influences. And as for there being a lot more to it, I know, but I'm emulating the arguments against Avatar. Just as there is a lot more to the replicants' situation, there was a lot more to Jake's decision to switch sides than people give it credit for. I don't even want to get started on how incredibly stupid and plot-hole-filled Blade Runner's story is. There's another example of style over story for you.
>No, I said the two of them as separate influences.
Oh, on Gattaca. If you think that the Invalid's treatment was based on that of the Replicants, you missed the entire point of the movie. It was a commentary on discrimination IN THE REAL WORLD. And sibling rivalry is hardly unique to the Bible. The thing about Gattaca is that sibling rivalry isn't the single defining trait of its main characters, unlike the stock archetypes in Avatar.
>Just as there is a lot more to the replicants' situation, there was a lot more to Jake's decision to switch sides than people give it credit for.
Please explain to me how there was anything involved besides Jake figuring out that the Na'vi are people too (what a shock!) and falling in love with Neytiri.
>I don't even want to get started on how incredibly stupid and plot-hole-filled Blade Runner's story is. There's another example of style over story for you.
Watch the Workprint; it works MUCH more effectively. I've always been annoyed by the lack of a single cut of that movie that brings out all of its best elements.
@StellarJetman Jake wanted to go to Pandora because he was sick and tired of people limiting him and judging him based off of his disability. As a Na'vi, it wasn't about discovering that they were people too (he already knew that) but that they were a society that judged him based on what he could do, not what he couldn't do, and that they opened up a world of possibilities and experiences that he never would have had as a human and gave him a place to belong. He found a home.
@StellarJetman Again, my belief that you didn't really watch Avatar crops up. First of all, Gattaca had its own stock archetypes, yet gave them personalties and depth, just as Cameron did. And yeah, I get that its about discrimination in the real world (which again, was done in many movies before Gattaca) which still comes back to the point that Gattaca was not an original story at all. But it was a well-told version of a familiar story, as Avatar is.
@StellarJetman Yeah, except I'm applying it in pretty much the same way people are bitching about Avatar. The theme has been used before, therefore it MUST be unoriginal. And you yourself said there have been dozens of other stories about conflicts between brothers and intolerance in the real world. Doesn't the very presence of that make it as 'unoriginal' and 'plagarized' as you claim Avatar is? Because its the exact same argument either way. They're old stories told in new, very well-told ways
>Second, you seriously think Roger Dean was the first to ever think of floating islands?
No, but I don't think for a moment that Cameron came up with them on his own, and I REALLY don't think that he got the idea from someone who came before Dean.
>Second, you seriously think Roger Dean was the first to ever think of floating islands?
No, but I don't think that Cameron came up with them on his own, and Dean is an obvious source.
>I've seen his painting; they don't look that similar.
That's because he paints stuff besides jungles. But ELEMENTS of his art show up verbatim, like the stone arches and the proportions of the trees on the plains. And the islands themselves DO look similar, they just aren't as smooth.
>And where did Cameron say, "I came up with this. ME! No one else!"?
You must have missed all the buzz back in '09 about the "incredible new world" of Pandora and how Cameron's "vision" brought it to life. And I wouldn't have minded if the arches and trees had been deliberate homages to Dean in the same way that the flames and the shot of the window dimming in Blade Runner were deliberate homages to Metropolis, but Cameron never mentioned Dean at all.
>And so you're only offended by the success. Kind of shallow, eh?
I'm offended by the fact that Cameron's been so SUCCESSFUL in passing another's work off as his own. Not the box-office gross; the way that people actually think that he's done something new and unique.
@StellarJetman It IS his own work. No matter how influenced you are, it is your own work. If we follow that logic, NO ONE except for the Greeks and the epic of Gilgamesh ever had worked that was not fully 'their own'. He HAS done something new and unique; create a whole new world and species that feels alive and real, unlike anything that has ever been done before. I mean, you think Cameron wasn't new or unique, look at Lucas. Star Wars is the most unoriginal, influenced idea ever put to film.
It's comprehensively realized, I'll give it that, but, regardless of Dean's involvement, it's HARDLY "unlike anything that has ever been done before". And I've already given my reasons for why the Na'vi are a terrible species.
@StellarJetman A terrible species? How so? You only seem to have a problem with how they are depicted rather than what they do, which is just live. In fact, this is a much better 'native' depiction than anything shown in films until now because the way they live with nature is given a reason; the planet IS them, it gives them life. I mean, if you were able to 'plug in' to a tree and speak with your ancestors, wouldn't you care a lot more about trees?
@StellarJetman Yes, Cameron's vision DID bring it to life. Of course he's going to have influences but unless he's directly copying them (which he didn't) he's not under any obligation to mention Dean, especially if Dean wasn't his influence. I mean, is he supposed to mention every single tiny detail that MIGHT have been influenced by someone else? I don't remember Lucas mentioning 'Hidden Fortress' with Star Wars or Scott mentioning Metropolis until years later.
@StellarJetman So I fail to see what your problem is. Yes, elements of his art may be similar, but I've heard at least a dozen other artists mentioned that show up in Avatar. Is Cameron ripping them off too? Hell, should every artist who's ever done something similar to Inception sue Christopher Nolan? Should old action serials sue Indiana Jones which copied action sequences verbatim? And what if Dean wasn't the inspiration for Cameron? Dean's stuff came out in the 70s.
I did some research on the subject, and it turns out that the concept artist responsible for the islands had no intention of specifically imitating Dean; he was just employing a visual motif that's been around for quite a while (and which I wouldn't have equated with Dean himself without the other elements, especially the arches, which I'm 100% sure ARE taken from his work). So that's a point that I'll concede.
@StellarJetman I am well aware that sci-fi is not all about special effects (an idea Michael Bay does not seem to get) but what I resent is that you seem to think Avatar has committed some vile atrocity and you are damning everything abuot it just because you don't like it. Originality can be found only in the details, not the story, nowadays and in how the story is told. Avatar was a brilliantly imaginative experience with a story we are familiar with told in the best way it has ever been told.
>I am well aware that sci-fi is not all about special effects
>That/s exactly what EVERY sci-fi film has done, show off new technology. All have very familiar stories, fairly two-dimensional characters, and old-hat morals.
>what I resent is that you seem to think Avatar has committed some vile atrocity and you are damning everything abuot it just because you don't like it.
I'm damning everything about it because I HATE everything about it. On a purely technical level, it's an unqualified success. How is it remotely good anywhere else, though?
>Originality can be found only in the details, not the story, nowadays and in how the story is told.
Which is why I'm not jumping on the "DURR ITS POCAHONTAS" bandwagon. That plot was old when Pocahontas did it.
Avatar wasn't even original in the DETAILS, though. I'd elaborate, but it would take too long and I already did in my response to airwolfflies, which you can read above.
It was a movie, not an "experience". And it was offensively unimaginative. Almost everything that I mentioned to airwolfflies jumped out at me on my first viewing, and I wasn't even looking for it. In fact, being a sci-fi fan, I was actively WANTING to enjoy the movie.
>with a story we are familiar with
Yes...
>told in the best way it has ever been told.
That's a teeeeeny bit presumptuous, wouldn't you say?
@StellarJetman Ok, I'm actually starting to doubt you saw the movie. If you consider it unimaginative, no film is imaginative then, because everything is borrowed in films. They are just told differently. Do you really think Tolkein was the first to use orcs or goblins? Was Lucas the first to think of creatures like Jabba the Hut? No. Pandora is the first planet shown on film that actually seems alive, that seems real, and not just a planet based around a single climate like a desert or tundra.
Tolkien was deliberately emulating European mythology, and Lucas was bound by the constraints of his time. When Avatar's main selling point is that it has a completely new world, and with the limitless visual power of modern CGI, the comparison is meaninigless. Try reading some sci-fi books sometime; you'll see LOTS of multi-biome planets. The only reason that they've taken so long to show up on film is that they're harder to make. And Enemy Mine had a multi-biome planet in 1985.
@StellarJetman Lucas wasn't bound by constraints in the 2000s, and he still gave single biome planets. And so Tolkien gets a pass on emulating old ideals but Cameron doesn't? Why? And does the fact that there are multi-biome planets in sci-fi books in any way take away from the incredible accomplisment of Pandora? Is 'The Abyss' suddenly worthless as the first film to use a CGI creation because CGI is used a lot nowadays?
>And so Tolkien gets a pass on emulating old ideals but Cameron doesn't? Why?
Because Pandora looks generic and Tolkien's elves and goblins are far more a product of Tolkien's prodigious imagination than they are a throwback to their mythological origins.
>Is 'The Abyss' suddenly worthless as the first film to use a CGI creation because CGI is used a lot nowadays?
The Last Starfighter was the first film to use CGI effects, but I don't see your point anyway.
@StellarJetman You want to talk generic, I'll give you Tatooine, Hoth, Endor anyday. Pandora looking generic? You mean, like how it's the first planet to really look like an actual other planet that we could possibly travel to? And right, because elves and goblins were completely original imaginations, not based on many things already done. And no, 'The Abyss' was the first film to create a CGI character: the water tentacle. But still, does overuse of CGI effects negate The Last Starfighter?
>Pandora looking generic? You mean, like how it's the first planet to really look like an actual other planet that we could possibly travel to?
Actually, it looks like a stylized derivative of sub-Saharan Africa. If anything, Tatooine and Hoth are the planets that we'd be traveling to (minus Hoth's unfathomable water cycle).
@StellarJetman I have absolutely no idea how you came up with sub-Saharan Africa, mainly because nothing about Pandora suggests Africa. If anything, I'm more reminded of South American rainforests except in a North American climate with European weather and Australian water-design. So, yeah, it feels much more like a believable planet and a much more INTERESTING one than a purely desert planet or a purely ice planet (both of which were using very Earth-like contextures in detail).
>And right, because elves and goblins were completely original imaginations, not based on many things already done.
They were inspired by ancient myths, yes. But the additions and alterations that Tolkien added to the (extremely) basic original concept are almost impossibly extensive; and you're seriously devaluing his work by suggesting that he simply recycled them from folklore in the same way that fantasy authors since the '80s have recycled them from his books.
@StellarJetman I'm not devaluating anyone. I love Tolkien and always have. I'm just showing how your arguments could easily be applied to him as well. I mean, what additions did he add besides minor details of culture that could have easily gone to the dwarves? What was it about them that Tolkien made completely original? They are great creations, yes, but I doubt they are the utterly-original, based-on-absolutely-nothing creation you seem to want. Difference is in the details, which Cameron did
@StellarJetman And no, it's not presumptuous. Yes, we've seen this story before (and I will say that about every single film that has come out in the last few decades) but it's the best-told version of it. Every character is given motivation and reasons behind what they do, both sides are shown as having pros and cons, the hero is not immediately looking to change sides on the out-set and his reasons for changing are beliveable, and this film actually has a heart behind it. It CARES.
T Rex roar... Zzz
rathianhunter98 1 day ago
Sounds like the rawr from the T-rex in Jurassic Park kinda 0:35 :3
xGACninjax 4 days ago
1:18 PURE AWSOME
ShahidTheFuzzy 5 days ago
AtendersgbvfffjgsgcsrjbxfjdJkn
..,S
jvang1219 1 week ago
ya its the one animal we all secretly want as a pet because we all now that it will pawn everything on earth. give it a rebreather harness and good bye earth predators. At its the ultimate kitty of kittyness. As for Turok our red dragon (we got open their dimension) will fry the beasty.
cybernako088 3 weeks ago
Awesome Scene :D But it was a bit to fast for 3D in my opinion ;)
Akatsukiangel100 1 month ago
0:40 I am reminded of Tarzan.
Disneythievesrock 1 month ago
btw, terra nova is the plot of avatar and jurassic park, with the human drama of lost and csi, not a hint of originality, still a good show tho... sometimes
natesdevices 2 months ago
i find it so remarkably sad that every single animal in jurassic park looked no less then ten times more real then anything in this movie
natesdevices 2 months ago
Usul573, it is pointless, but it makes me feel better about what Lucas has done to Star Wars. I'm well within my rights to complain when some asshole takes it upon themselves to ruin everything I loved as a child. As many have said before, George Lucas raped my childhood.
But, James Cameron here, has sufficiently made up for that fat asshole, Lucas's mistakes.
LukeLovesRose 3 months ago
Were those rubber bullets he was firing at the Thanator's head from Point Blank range?
OffDWallNotDRack 3 months ago
@OffDWallNotDRack all the big animals on pandora have carbonfiber-armoured skin, so most of them are extremely hard to kill. however, the thanotor's weak spot is it's belly, as quaritch quickly figured out.
Creaturelover18 1 month ago
awesome
vishnuap100 3 months ago
1:15 OMG ! Authentic Jurassic Park T-Rex bark !! Hope James paid his royalties on this one !
nikoBCN 4 months ago
AVATAR has pushed CGI to the next level. I want to tell something, no matter how hard they do there is something lacking because its not real. I have researched on CGI for all most 3 yrs what i found was u cant cheat real world. CGI is still in its infancy even now after avatar. There still lots to be done to make it look real. Maybe in next 100 yrs it may become possible.
sandy57040 4 months ago
lol you know the name of the animal wtf? this movie sucks
YAHSPETSNAZ 4 months ago
It's very Ironic that it sounds like a Jurassic park T-Rex and that James Cameron describes it as a "panther from hell" that would "eat a T-Rex and have the Alien for desert" LOL XD luv dat quote
145turkboy 4 months ago
Did anyone realize that the thanator has got the same roar as the trex in jurassic park?
dragonmcmx 4 months ago
Anyone else feel like this sequence is more fucking awesome than ANYTHING in the Star Wars prequels?
LukeLovesRose 4 months ago
for example, chase is one of such typical themes
alexgrinkov 5 months ago
With one or two shots, Cameron makes George Lucas look like the hack he is. I mean, just look at the craftsmanship here and then, take a look at the Star Wars prequels or Indiana Jones 4, for Christs sake.
LukeLovesRose 6 months ago
@LukeLovesRose
Why do people feel the need to hate on Lucas more? What's the point?
Usul573 3 months ago
And man, the plot complaints for this are so lazy and shallow. People compare if to DWW (parallels are def there) but that movie is 20 years old. I mean are these people watching that movie over and over? Odds are most haven't even seen it. This is a classic story that deservedly gets updated from time to time, this one having a sci-fi spin on it. Every other month we get superhero movies that follow the exact same formula, yet no one bitches about that? People are hypocrites.
FlightoftheSpeedKing 6 months ago
@FlightoftheSpeedKing
i agree. actually I read somewhere that in literature studies, someone even counted all possible themes/plots of all books/stories and they are like under 10-20, they are just set in different times/locations/have different details aroudn them
alexgrinkov 5 months ago
With so much visual creativity and originality, it is strange that some of the creature sounds are from JP. Honestly though I've come to see it as a homage to one of the great CGI/monster flicks. To those who complain it's not alien enough, your missing the point. Pandora serves as a heightened and enhanced version of our earth, it is very symbolic of the things we've done to our own planet.
FlightoftheSpeedKing 6 months ago 2
Bamboo grow on other planets too? wow!
alessandrozerbone 7 months ago
so everyones gonna hate this movie because the animals sound like dinosaurs and no one can really grasp the story concept? wut do you want them to sound like? ducks?
CrypticYang 7 months ago
@CrypticYang I was pumped it sounded like a Jurassic Park T-rex XD
TheRuinofDarkness 6 months ago
I can't take this Thanator creature seriously because the sounds are from the T-Rex from Jurassic Park. I'd be so offended if i was Spielberg. Jurassic Park sounds are original and should be left alone! Also at 1:44 it sounds like King Kong from back in 70's .... smh
luigimon25 7 months ago
@luigimon25 who the fuck cares? the t-rex roars for instance has been used everywhere that involves dinosaurs since JP came out, and people go nerdraging when it's applied to an alien cat? That's just nerdy horseshit. I'm surprised nobody complained when the lion-roar was applied to the predators in AvP, or when the bantha-roar from star wars was applied to most of the herbivorous dinosaurs in lost world.
Creaturelover18 1 month ago
Comment removed
luigimon25 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Best MOVIE Ever . . .
prokreten 7 months ago
this was awesome in 3d
haydnc7 7 months ago
Almost all of the animal sounds are completely stolen from Jurassic Park.
Thanator = T rex
Horse thingies = velociraptors.
ToddIngram1000 7 months ago
@ToddIngram1000 I AGREE!!! UGH.
luigimon25 7 months ago
1:13 Jurassic Park Tyrannosaur, anybody? :D
RandomRetardedKid 8 months ago 2
@RandomRetardedKid Yeah I hear it too.
xXnXnXnXx 8 months ago
awwwwwwwwww, wat a cute lil kitty :)
TheBringerOfPS3 8 months ago
Excellent movie, really proved motion capture animation can be perfected like LOTR or King Kong by PJ. Sure Cameron borrowed from Last of the Mohicans, Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind (aka Warriors of the Wind), Ferngully, Willow, Dances with Wolves, Broken Arrow (1950), Forte Apache, The Searchers, Dune, Heavy Metal, Starchaser Legend of Orin, Princess Mononoke, Castle in The Sky (Laputa), Pom Poko, Star Wars, Star Trek 6 and Fantastic Planet but it was a great time.
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@Johnlindsey289
LOL. Add fuel to the fire, asshole. Let's also say that Cameron took from Platoon, Saving Private Ryan, Apocalypse Now... LOL. Jesus, you've listed every great film that features Native Americans. LOL. You don't think this is a tad bit ridiculous??
LukeLovesRose 6 months ago
@LukeLovesRose
What abouit a man called Horse? the true inspiration.
Johnlindsey289 6 months ago
These creatures plus the jungles look like something out of Heavy Metal magazine, anyone noticed that? Cameron is a fan of HM Magazine aka Metal Hurlant and used it as one of his inspirations
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
did anyone notice Grace's avatar's nose isn't flat like jake's?
ub3rn00b6 9 months ago
Isn't that the same sound effect used for the roar of the T-rexs in Jurassic Park?
PaveLowPat01 9 months ago
run its a angry alien kitty. I want one.
countedscars 10 months ago
Take the Rancor from SW: it also resembles a huge crocodile -warped, bigger head- standing on back legs - looks so different already.
iUDods 10 months ago
Please tell me: you really want to bash this movie comparing it to one of the best animated feature films? That's not bashing.
iUDods 10 months ago
Actually, I can't really see why Avatar has an "unoriginal" plot. People say it is, but...the only thing they ever compare it to is two movies. And that's all?
Come on, give us more!
Aperrentis 10 months ago
best scene in avatar : and what abou this one ?
RRRRUUUUUNNNN DIFINETLI RUN!!!!!!
dinosaurhunter44 10 months ago
@andrewutube1000
The Thanator is able to take down one of those Hammerhead Rhinos. Those critters are built to survive any kind of abuse you can think of. Their armor is extraordinarily thick. So, I would imagine the Thanator is pretty hard to take down.
Gunfire doesn't work. But, obviously, a knife or a spear in the right place, might be able to bring down this king of the Pandora jungles. lol.
LukeLovesRose 11 months ago
This is TOO intense!
RandomKid5198 11 months ago
16 people were eaten by Thanators.
FilmFTW1 11 months ago
@FilmFTW1 LOL
oopaulorafael 11 months ago
Great chase but too cliche at some parts
oopaulorafael 11 months ago
@goldenbulletwolf666 Sounds cool, but Thanotors are lone predators, like tigers.
Creaturelover18 11 months ago
Thumbs up if you think this is the best and most amazing part of the movie.
gerhajdu 11 months ago
I've seen this before watching the movie but when I saw this in cinema I sh*ted in my pants. Most of all when the Thanator screamed and jumped on Jake.
iUDods 11 months ago
@andrewutube1000 maybe but i still have my doubts about that...
scagish 11 months ago
dude he has a freaking shotgun and is runing....
scagish 11 months ago
@scagish Dude, even Quaritch had a hard time beating it, with a freakin AMP suit!!!! So, Jake standing against would look like a cat going against a lion. haha, easy lunch.
Obnavo 11 months ago
@Obnavo dude but a cat with a freaking shotgun
scagish 11 months ago
@scagish Nevermind........ o_o
Obnavo 11 months ago
Titanic and Avatar are simply being trashed, because of the hype, because they are so successful. If you loved either film, don't let anyone else shake that opinion. Watch Avatar or Titanic with pride. Not one filmmaker in the history of film has been able to accomplish what James Cameron has accomplished. He is freakin' extraordinary. An alien of film-making. He is THAT good.
LukeLovesRose 1 year ago 7
@LukeLovesRose
I hate Avatar, but not because of the hype. I hate it because it's an awful movie.
Aliens and Terminator were good, though.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
You have no idea what an awful movie looks like.
Go watch scenes from The Room if you want "awful," jackass.
LukeLovesRose 11 months ago
@LukeLovesRose
That's a different kind of awful. I've seen The Room. I've seen Troll 2. I've seen Plan 9 from Outer Space. And I think that they're hilarious.
But Avatar? Not only is it a big-budget movie to be judged by big-budget standards, it's a movie with an undeservedly high reputation. It's a movie with legions of fans and positive reviews, which wouldn't have a tenth as many without the magic of CGI and emotional manipulation. It's a movie that I simply can't stand.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
Which Cameron movie is better? True Lies or Avatar? do you think Avatar is as bad as Lynch's 1984 Sci-fi trainwreck known as Dune?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@StellarJetman
Well you are entitled to your opinion. But with worldwide sales already past the billion dollar mark and still climbing, it appears you are among the very few who did not like this quite beautifully filmed and adventure filled sci fi movie by James Cameron. Can you be more specific about your dislikes of this movie? Like what scenes or dialogues and so forth where you decided you hate this wonderfully written sci fi adventure film.
airwolfflies 11 months ago
@airwolfflies
First of all, sales mean nothing. The Da Vinci Code was a best-seller. Twilight continues to be massively popular as a book and film series. Neither, and I'm sure that you'll agree, is especially good in any way.
Second, a movie can be both bad and well-directed. David Fincher's cinematography in Alien³ was nothing short of brilliant, but the movie itself is mediocre at best, even in its extended cut.
I'm running out of characters here, so I'll continue in another comment.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
Third, I never "decided" to hate Avatar, any more than I "decided" to like Terminator. I hate Avatar; I like Terminator.
Now, about Avatar itself.
It's absolutely loaded with plagiarism and clichés. I'm not talking about the plot, as that's irrelevant - it doesn't matter how old a story is as long as you tell it right. I'm talking about everything else.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
The "new world" that James Cameron pretends to have invented is absurdly derivative. Pandora is literally a collection of Roger Dean paintings rendered in 3D - the floating mountains, the loops of stone, the coastline's lighting and rock formations, the flat-topped trees of the plains, the hypersaturated green of the jungle itself. All of these elements can be found in Dean's artwork going back to the '70s, and they're reproduced in Avatar with VERY little stylistic deviation.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
The creatures that populate Pandora show similar unoriginality, being simple alterations to existing Earth animals, such as horses, dogs, and monkeys. Occasionally, animals will be combined, such as the hybrid of rhinoceros and hammerhead shark seen in this clip. Even the stylization that the animals exhibit is of a sort often seen in fantasy art, such as that of Rodney Matthews. Matthews and Dean are well-known artists, and it would be silly to ascribe this to coincidence.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
Finally, the Na'vi themselves are disgustingly generic pastiches of every "native" stereotype and cliché imaginable, set up to embody the long-discredited "noble savage" stereotype as a foil against the eeeeevil White Man. Their pantheistic religion (expressed, of course, in communal chanting and dancing), their arrows and war paint, their language's derivation from those spoken in West Africa (something in which Cameron seems to take pride) are all marks of extreme laziness.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
But enough about Pandora. Let's talk about the people, shall we?
Avatar's "characters" are cardboard cutouts, clichés who would have been right at home in the B-movies of the '50s, with precious little to develop them as individuals. Sully is as boringly heroic as protagonists come; Augustine is the thoughtful, right-minded scientist against Quaritch's Viet Nam-era saber-rattling (and I mean that it was a cliché even back then); all are intensely unimaginative.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
The Na'vi characters are even more stereotypical than their human counterparts. Each can be described, in entirety, in two words:
Tsu'tey - Brave warrior
Eytucan - Tribal chief
Mo'at - Witch doctor
Neytiri - Native princess
These are archetypes that would be considered racist in their simplicity in any other film. But, because Avatar is such a tree-hugger of a movie, people actually accept them as far more than the pathetic sketches that they are.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
Finally, to round out this charming picture, each culture itself is entirely devoted to one side of the black-and-white division of morality that constitutes the film's central conflict. The humans are unambiguously Bad, making half-hearted shows of diplomacy in an attempt to placate the natives while indulging in every Captain Planet-level example of environmental destruction at their disposal, calling them "savages" at every turn as if they're from the 19th century.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
On the extreme opposite end of the spectrum lie the Na'vi. Living as much "in harmony with nature" as is physically possible (yet another way in which the movie appeals to fiction rather than fact in its depiction of indigenes), they're as pure as the driven snow, simultaneously as brave-hearted as any warrior archetype could hope to be and spiritually "sensitive" enough to hold funerals for animals killed in self-defense. The caricature couldn't be any more transparent.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
We now come to the "epic" final conflict, a showdown between Good and Evil to allegedly rival those in such cultural touchstones as Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings. One one side are the peaceful natives, driven to the brink of war by an invading force; on the other, a legion of imperialistic nature-rapists who won't let little things like cultural genocide get betwen them and that sweet, sweet profit margin. It's a fight between Right and Wrong, between Us and Them.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
How ironic, then, that it's all started by the supposed "hero"'s complete lack of competence. For someone who was sent to Pandora entirely for the purpose of reaching a mutual agreement between the humans and Na'vi, he spends an awful lot of time doing exactly nothing to achieve that. When tensions finally boil over, it's because he made no attempt to prevent it, preferring to date Neytiri instead of negotiate with her father - the latter of which being his actual job there.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
And, now, the battle itself. Given that it's the last resort after a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make peace, that it's the culmination of large-scale distrust and incrementally growing hostility on both sides, you'd expect it to be a tragedy, perhaps an opportunity for the movie to espouse another traditionally liberal message: that war is unequivocally Bad. Sadly, it's the biggest glorification of war that I've seen on-screen, and unquestionably the biggest post-Viet Nam.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
The humans are the bad guys here, not because they're bad, but because they're human. When Quaritch accuses Sully of betraying his "own race", we're meant to disagree with him, to think that he's being racist himself. In fact, Sully should be having a huge internal conflict of loyalty here. He should kill because he finally HAS to, because he has no other choice. He should be torn between his humanity and the Na'vi's need for assistance.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
But, no, he's finally Seen The Light and realized that humans are the bad guys after all. And the movie evidently wants the audience to believe that, too, as it lovingly cuts to such ostensibly horrifying scenes as a man being smashed between two cube-shaped bombs, a man screaming in terror as he's crushed to pulp under the foot of a massive beast, or a man shredded by the blades of a helicopter, while dramatic, triumphant music swells on the soundtrack.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
In contrast to that, we have every Na'vi death enshrined in slow-motion, accompanied by melancholy (and very "native"-sounding) wails of sadness. Even a bullet to the arm gets this treatment. So, what's the movie trying to say here? That it's OK for people to die horribly if they were fighting for the wrong side? I have assume that every human soldier was as morally rotten as Selfridge and Quaritch because they were subordinate to them. What? How does that make sense?
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
In the end, Sully decides to leave that nasty old human body of his and take up permanent residence in a Na'vi body, in case we missed the point about humans being inherently evil and the Na'vi being inherently good. The other humans fly away, presumably for good (although it would make much more sense that, after a defeat like that, they'd come back with a full military garrison and simply wipe the Na'vi out, given their portrayal here), and everyone lives Happily Ever After.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
My revulsion for its naked (and, sadly, largely successful, given its reception) attempts to pass of plagiarism as groundbreaking innovation, its pervasively stereotypical presentation of everything that it concerns, and its thoroughly disgusting morals aside (and, believe me, I could have written at least three times as much as I did on any of those subjects), I think that it's a decent enough film, at least on a technical level.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
The rendering detail is second to one, and James Cameron's deft hand for action sequences is as well-employed here as it has ever been; the aforementioned battle sequence is at least choreographed brilliantly. There are plenty of visually striking shots, such as Jake's awakening from cryosleep, or the massive, hovering wedge of the Valkyrie shuttle. I might have even been able to grudgingly accept the film as an enjoyable one for those elements alone, had it been any other.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
But I can't. I can't accept its Roger Dean scenery when James Cameron's trying to sell it as his own idea; I can't accept the cardboard characters when the marketing team and fanbase are exalting the film as a triumph of storytelling; I can't BEGIN to accept the heavy-handed and completely wrong-headed moralizing when the film is so self-righteous and pretends to have a Message That Makes You Think, as opposed to simply being a big, dumb action movie.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
I sincerely hope that I've made my perspective clear. Hopefully, reading it might even call yours into question.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Indeed, Avatar is too over-appreciated and over-rated. James did better works, like (as you said) Aliens and Terminator 2.
oopaulorafael 10 months ago
@oopaulorafael I can't agree more on that. Aliens was just... GENIUS, EPIC AND MANY OTHER GOOD THINGS. Terminator 2 is kick-ass. But after True Lies... he then made overrated films (of course, Titanic feeling like Gone with the Wind, which the latter should have better credit for being a lot more realistic.) And now, he's making sequels to Avatar, which is a ripoff of the stories of Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves (which are better than Avatar). WHEN WILL THIS END?!
FilmFTW1 10 months ago
@FilmFTW1 Avatar sequels will serve only to make money...
oopaulorafael 10 months ago
@FilmFTW1 It's not really a rip-off of Pocahontas since he wrote Avatar before that even came out.
Aperrentis 10 months ago
@Aperrentis Right.... well, I'm aware of that. But for a film that sets in the future, we would expect this advanced civilization to be more technological than what we're going through right now. But nope. It uses old native american times to illustrate the future of this planet, Pandora. This is why the film feels like the old stories of Pocahontas. (I'm not referring to the Disney film because that, too, was based upon true stories of Pocahontas... with a few liberties.).
FilmFTW1 10 months ago
@FilmFTW1
Do you think Avatar is Cameron's worst film?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@Johnlindsey289 Well, in story, it's the weakest, but the Visual effects is what makes this film popular... but it's not Cameron's worst film. I prefer this more than Titanic.
FilmFTW1 9 months ago
@FilmFTW1 Take a look at this over-rated-and-appreciated video about Avatar
Neytiri Interview
watch?v=KcBuqUDLg7w
oopaulorafael 10 months ago
@FilmFTW1
Do you think this movie is as good as DWW? do you think Sam Worthington is as good as Costner?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@oopaulorafael
Do you think this movie is as good as those 2 or is Avatar Cameron's worst film? do you think it deserves it's success?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@Johnlindsey289 I don't think it deserves its success. I don't know if it's Cameron's worst because I didn't seen all Cameron's films.
oopaulorafael 9 months ago
@StellarJetman
Do you think this is James Cameron's worst film? do you think it deserves it's success as the number one movie or all time or is it the biggest fraud in film history? why do you think it's a success?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
One of the greatest CGI ever made. Thumbs up if you agree.
sLAUGHTER115 1 year ago
sounds like the p trex, awesoooommmeeeee!!
cubanitodPdR 1 year ago 2
Fantastic. I'm considering buying a 3-D lcd just so I can re-visit this awesome planet. I'm not happy about missing the August re-release! I'd pay sixty bucks to see it again on the big screen but alas, that ain't likely to happen for a while. I'm glad I got to see it four times!
Scrumpilump2000 1 year ago
t-rex of pandora no doubt
acidongitim 1 year ago 4
@acidongitim
Naah. It's a pussycat. Look at it fight Quaritch. Toruk was king.
pinheadman665 3 months ago
"this movie is not G rated" lol
lovedarlingjulie2435 1 year ago
Amen...I love the haters alot of them saying flop, but Avatar broke every SWS and Lord of the rings film in two. :) Haters can be in denial all they want, but by the 3rd Avatar sequel it will blow away every movie franchise ever made. :)
Avatar is SWS magnified to the 5th power :)
kalel248 1 year ago
there's bamboo on pandora??????
TheJimzhe842 1 year ago
@TheJimzhe842 Pandoroo
Fierball360 1 year ago
@goldenbulletwolf666
The killings weren't too detailed, neither was the sex-scene, and the swearing isn't that extreme. They basically say "bullshit, "shit" and "dammit", but never "fuck", swear words that even kids today say. We used to see fighting and death in Disney and Don Bluth-films, remember??
Creaturelover18 1 year ago
1:03 Thanator: Give Me That!
Renkel76 1 year ago
@goldenbulletwolf666 That's pretty much what was going to happen, but they thought it would be too gory so they scratched that. James wanted the whole family to watch, so he couldn't put in gore.
Creaturelover18 1 year ago
@goldenbulletwolf666 I thought the same as well. But we do remember that when the na'vi and a beast connect their brains, the na'vi can give any command and the beast will obey. Apparently Neytiri have never encountered a guy in an AMP-suit before. On it's own, the Thanator would have killed Quaritch easily. A scene had to be deleted depicting the Thanotor tearing open the canopy of a guy's AMP-suit and eats him.
Creaturelover18 1 year ago
1:13 sounds just like the video, The many roars of a Trex, at 1:17
AutumnDragon1 1 year ago
1:15 T-REX returns!!!
bastiansakre 1 year ago
your right it is the t-rex from jurrasic park..........cool :)
kegg13216 1 year ago
0:57-THIS IS....PANDORA!!
Starscream66778 1 year ago
This movie is the worst one! EVER!!... Such an Hollywood Crap ³
spillerxxxxx 1 year ago
@spillerxxxxx
Do you think it has the right to be the highest grossing movie of all time? and just because it became a high money maker doesn't mean it's good right? do you think this will ever be as good as Cameron's Aliens and Terminator movies?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
AVATAR IS PURE AWESOMENESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AlexTriceratops123 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you would like to find out what James Cameron is doing now, watch this: youtube.com/watch?v=TKZ4RolQxec
noteviljustwrong 1 year ago
i know a bunch of fanboys are gonna hate me but this movie was not the greatest movie of all time, not even close, it wasnt bad but nowhere near the best, this movie is basically dancing with smurfs
tsadavid4205000 1 year ago
@tsadavid4205000
Do you think this is as good as dances?
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
thats right you little idiots, thumbs up the lame fanboy trolls who have no knowledge of good cinema
amazing.
SmokiSounds 1 year ago
@SmokiSounds Look up the definition of 'troll'. I can assure you it is not saying they like something, in this case a really, really damn good film. Troll is someone who needlessly and pointlessly insults people who disagree with them. aka, you
thejoexman 1 year ago
@thejoexman If this senseless, soulless visual eyecandy spectacle means "a damn good film" to you, well, congratulations, you deserve pity. Let alone sympathising a "best movie evarrrrr" troll.
SmokiSounds 1 year ago
@SmokiSounds There is plenty of soul behind this movie, but if you don't want to see that, fine. And if you don't want to accept the fact that some people may have different opinions than you and continue to look down upon them out of some misplaced sense of superiority just because you think bashing this film makes you 'innovative' and 'new-wave', then I pity you. Especially since you still don't understand wat makes a 'troll' (hint: you're the textbook definition)
thejoexman 1 year ago
@thejoexman lol, think I'm bashing it to be "different" from most? What you think, I'm 13 or something? Please. ALL this movie is, is a showcase of new emotion capture technology. Nothing more, nothing less. And so when I see a lame troll screaming "best movie EVARRR", I'm not going to respect that bullshit opinion.
The textbook definition of a troll is at the top of best rated comments. It's ok though.
SmokiSounds 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SmokiSounds Yes, you do happen to have the maturity of a 13-year old. And for your benefit, the definition of troll: a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response. Yes, saying Avatar is the best movie ever is TOTALLY inflammatory, not like saying you pity people who disagree with you. Bah
thejoexman 1 year ago
@SmokiSounds Oh, and as for your opinions on Avatar, yes the main purpose was to advance technology, but guess what? That/s exactly what EVERY sci-fi film has done, show off new technology. All have very familiar stories, fairly two-dimensional characters, and old-hat morals. At least in Avatar it bothered to explain stuff and make it seem like there was a point behind what was happening. There is not one sci-fi film that has not done exactly what Avatar did, just in a different way.
thejoexman 1 year ago
@thejoexman
How can you say that with a straight face? Have you even SEEN a sci-fi movie besides Star Wars and its imitators? What about Blade Runner? Gattaca? The Wrath of Khan?
I might as well just list a few more good sci-fi movies here, since you have such a misguided opinion of the genre:
Moon
Serenity
Sunshine
Children of Men
Solaris
Watch those, then tell me that the sci-fi genre is a cheap excuse to throw special effects on the screen.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman I have seen dozens of sci-fi films, including the ones you listed. And you know what I noticed? Every single one of them had a story I had seen a dozen times before. Having an original story as you desire it just doesn't exist anymore. I defy you to name ONE sci-fi film that has a completely original concept that hasn't been done before. You claim (wrongly) that Avatar is 'plagarism'. It's not even the worst example of borrowed material.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
>I defy you to name ONE sci-fi film that has a completely original concept that hasn't been done before.
Uh, Gattaca. Right above you.
>You claim (wrongly) that Avatar is 'plagarism'.
And how am I wrong in calling Avatar plagiaristic? James Cameron blatantly stole design elements from Roger Dean and called them his own.
>It's not even the worst example of borrowed material.
I know that, but it's CERTAINLY the most SUCCESSFUL example.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Right, because we've NEVER seen a society that separates the 'superior' beings from the inferior ones (Blade Runner) with a struggle between two brothers based on superiority (The Ten Commandments). Second, you seriously think Roger Dean was the first to ever think of floating islands? I've seen his painting; they don't look that similar. And where did Cameron say, "I came up with this. ME! No one else!"? And so you're only offended by the success. Kind of shallow, eh?
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
>Right, because we've NEVER seen a society that separates the 'superior' beings from the inferior ones (Blade Runner) with a struggle between two brothers based on superiority (The Ten Commandments).
So Blade Runner ripped off the Bible? Huh? And there was a LOT more to the replicants' situation than being "separated" from Earth.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman No, I said the two of them as separate influences. And as for there being a lot more to it, I know, but I'm emulating the arguments against Avatar. Just as there is a lot more to the replicants' situation, there was a lot more to Jake's decision to switch sides than people give it credit for. I don't even want to get started on how incredibly stupid and plot-hole-filled Blade Runner's story is. There's another example of style over story for you.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
>No, I said the two of them as separate influences.
Oh, on Gattaca. If you think that the Invalid's treatment was based on that of the Replicants, you missed the entire point of the movie. It was a commentary on discrimination IN THE REAL WORLD. And sibling rivalry is hardly unique to the Bible. The thing about Gattaca is that sibling rivalry isn't the single defining trait of its main characters, unlike the stock archetypes in Avatar.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>Just as there is a lot more to the replicants' situation, there was a lot more to Jake's decision to switch sides than people give it credit for.
Please explain to me how there was anything involved besides Jake figuring out that the Na'vi are people too (what a shock!) and falling in love with Neytiri.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StellarJetman
>I don't even want to get started on how incredibly stupid and plot-hole-filled Blade Runner's story is. There's another example of style over story for you.
Watch the Workprint; it works MUCH more effectively. I've always been annoyed by the lack of a single cut of that movie that brings out all of its best elements.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Jake wanted to go to Pandora because he was sick and tired of people limiting him and judging him based off of his disability. As a Na'vi, it wasn't about discovering that they were people too (he already knew that) but that they were a society that judged him based on what he could do, not what he couldn't do, and that they opened up a world of possibilities and experiences that he never would have had as a human and gave him a place to belong. He found a home.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Again, my belief that you didn't really watch Avatar crops up. First of all, Gattaca had its own stock archetypes, yet gave them personalties and depth, just as Cameron did. And yeah, I get that its about discrimination in the real world (which again, was done in many movies before Gattaca) which still comes back to the point that Gattaca was not an original story at all. But it was a well-told version of a familiar story, as Avatar is.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
How is Gattaca not an original story because one of its themes has been used before? Don't you know the difference between a premise and a plot?
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Yeah, except I'm applying it in pretty much the same way people are bitching about Avatar. The theme has been used before, therefore it MUST be unoriginal. And you yourself said there have been dozens of other stories about conflicts between brothers and intolerance in the real world. Doesn't the very presence of that make it as 'unoriginal' and 'plagarized' as you claim Avatar is? Because its the exact same argument either way. They're old stories told in new, very well-told ways
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
I was going to leave, but you posted this while I was still writing my other comment. I can only say this:
I DON'T CARE ABOUT WHETHER THE PLOT'S ORIGINAL OR NOT. READ WHAT I ACTUALLY WROTE.
Bye, and I mean it this time.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StellarJetman
>Second, you seriously think Roger Dean was the first to ever think of floating islands?
No, but I don't think for a moment that Cameron came up with them on his own, and I REALLY don't think that he got the idea from someone who came before Dean.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>Second, you seriously think Roger Dean was the first to ever think of floating islands?
No, but I don't think that Cameron came up with them on his own, and Dean is an obvious source.
>I've seen his painting; they don't look that similar.
That's because he paints stuff besides jungles. But ELEMENTS of his art show up verbatim, like the stone arches and the proportions of the trees on the plains. And the islands themselves DO look similar, they just aren't as smooth.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>And where did Cameron say, "I came up with this. ME! No one else!"?
You must have missed all the buzz back in '09 about the "incredible new world" of Pandora and how Cameron's "vision" brought it to life. And I wouldn't have minded if the arches and trees had been deliberate homages to Dean in the same way that the flames and the shot of the window dimming in Blade Runner were deliberate homages to Metropolis, but Cameron never mentioned Dean at all.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>And so you're only offended by the success. Kind of shallow, eh?
I'm offended by the fact that Cameron's been so SUCCESSFUL in passing another's work off as his own. Not the box-office gross; the way that people actually think that he's done something new and unique.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman It IS his own work. No matter how influenced you are, it is your own work. If we follow that logic, NO ONE except for the Greeks and the epic of Gilgamesh ever had worked that was not fully 'their own'. He HAS done something new and unique; create a whole new world and species that feels alive and real, unlike anything that has ever been done before. I mean, you think Cameron wasn't new or unique, look at Lucas. Star Wars is the most unoriginal, influenced idea ever put to film.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
It's comprehensively realized, I'll give it that, but, regardless of Dean's involvement, it's HARDLY "unlike anything that has ever been done before". And I've already given my reasons for why the Na'vi are a terrible species.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman A terrible species? How so? You only seem to have a problem with how they are depicted rather than what they do, which is just live. In fact, this is a much better 'native' depiction than anything shown in films until now because the way they live with nature is given a reason; the planet IS them, it gives them life. I mean, if you were able to 'plug in' to a tree and speak with your ancestors, wouldn't you care a lot more about trees?
thejoexman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Yes, Cameron's vision DID bring it to life. Of course he's going to have influences but unless he's directly copying them (which he didn't) he's not under any obligation to mention Dean, especially if Dean wasn't his influence. I mean, is he supposed to mention every single tiny detail that MIGHT have been influenced by someone else? I don't remember Lucas mentioning 'Hidden Fortress' with Star Wars or Scott mentioning Metropolis until years later.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman So I fail to see what your problem is. Yes, elements of his art may be similar, but I've heard at least a dozen other artists mentioned that show up in Avatar. Is Cameron ripping them off too? Hell, should every artist who's ever done something similar to Inception sue Christopher Nolan? Should old action serials sue Indiana Jones which copied action sequences verbatim? And what if Dean wasn't the inspiration for Cameron? Dean's stuff came out in the 70s.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
I did some research on the subject, and it turns out that the concept artist responsible for the islands had no intention of specifically imitating Dean; he was just employing a visual motif that's been around for quite a while (and which I wouldn't have equated with Dean himself without the other elements, especially the arches, which I'm 100% sure ARE taken from his work). So that's a point that I'll concede.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman I am well aware that sci-fi is not all about special effects (an idea Michael Bay does not seem to get) but what I resent is that you seem to think Avatar has committed some vile atrocity and you are damning everything abuot it just because you don't like it. Originality can be found only in the details, not the story, nowadays and in how the story is told. Avatar was a brilliantly imaginative experience with a story we are familiar with told in the best way it has ever been told.
thejoexman 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thejoexman
>I am well aware that sci-fi is not all about special effects
>That/s exactly what EVERY sci-fi film has done, show off new technology. All have very familiar stories, fairly two-dimensional characters, and old-hat morals.
Reconcile these statements.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>what I resent is that you seem to think Avatar has committed some vile atrocity and you are damning everything abuot it just because you don't like it.
I'm damning everything about it because I HATE everything about it. On a purely technical level, it's an unqualified success. How is it remotely good anywhere else, though?
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>Originality can be found only in the details, not the story, nowadays and in how the story is told.
Which is why I'm not jumping on the "DURR ITS POCAHONTAS" bandwagon. That plot was old when Pocahontas did it.
Avatar wasn't even original in the DETAILS, though. I'd elaborate, but it would take too long and I already did in my response to airwolfflies, which you can read above.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>Avatar was a brilliantly imaginative experience
It was a movie, not an "experience". And it was offensively unimaginative. Almost everything that I mentioned to airwolfflies jumped out at me on my first viewing, and I wasn't even looking for it. In fact, being a sci-fi fan, I was actively WANTING to enjoy the movie.
>with a story we are familiar with
Yes...
>told in the best way it has ever been told.
That's a teeeeeny bit presumptuous, wouldn't you say?
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Ok, I'm actually starting to doubt you saw the movie. If you consider it unimaginative, no film is imaginative then, because everything is borrowed in films. They are just told differently. Do you really think Tolkein was the first to use orcs or goblins? Was Lucas the first to think of creatures like Jabba the Hut? No. Pandora is the first planet shown on film that actually seems alive, that seems real, and not just a planet based around a single climate like a desert or tundra.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
Tolkien was deliberately emulating European mythology, and Lucas was bound by the constraints of his time. When Avatar's main selling point is that it has a completely new world, and with the limitless visual power of modern CGI, the comparison is meaninigless. Try reading some sci-fi books sometime; you'll see LOTS of multi-biome planets. The only reason that they've taken so long to show up on film is that they're harder to make. And Enemy Mine had a multi-biome planet in 1985.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman Lucas wasn't bound by constraints in the 2000s, and he still gave single biome planets. And so Tolkien gets a pass on emulating old ideals but Cameron doesn't? Why? And does the fact that there are multi-biome planets in sci-fi books in any way take away from the incredible accomplisment of Pandora? Is 'The Abyss' suddenly worthless as the first film to use a CGI creation because CGI is used a lot nowadays?
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
>And so Tolkien gets a pass on emulating old ideals but Cameron doesn't? Why?
Because Pandora looks generic and Tolkien's elves and goblins are far more a product of Tolkien's prodigious imagination than they are a throwback to their mythological origins.
>Is 'The Abyss' suddenly worthless as the first film to use a CGI creation because CGI is used a lot nowadays?
The Last Starfighter was the first film to use CGI effects, but I don't see your point anyway.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman You want to talk generic, I'll give you Tatooine, Hoth, Endor anyday. Pandora looking generic? You mean, like how it's the first planet to really look like an actual other planet that we could possibly travel to? And right, because elves and goblins were completely original imaginations, not based on many things already done. And no, 'The Abyss' was the first film to create a CGI character: the water tentacle. But still, does overuse of CGI effects negate The Last Starfighter?
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
>Pandora looking generic? You mean, like how it's the first planet to really look like an actual other planet that we could possibly travel to?
Actually, it looks like a stylized derivative of sub-Saharan Africa. If anything, Tatooine and Hoth are the planets that we'd be traveling to (minus Hoth's unfathomable water cycle).
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman I have absolutely no idea how you came up with sub-Saharan Africa, mainly because nothing about Pandora suggests Africa. If anything, I'm more reminded of South American rainforests except in a North American climate with European weather and Australian water-design. So, yeah, it feels much more like a believable planet and a much more INTERESTING one than a purely desert planet or a purely ice planet (both of which were using very Earth-like contextures in detail).
thejoexman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman
>And right, because elves and goblins were completely original imaginations, not based on many things already done.
They were inspired by ancient myths, yes. But the additions and alterations that Tolkien added to the (extremely) basic original concept are almost impossibly extensive; and you're seriously devaluing his work by suggesting that he simply recycled them from folklore in the same way that fantasy authors since the '80s have recycled them from his books.
StellarJetman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman I'm not devaluating anyone. I love Tolkien and always have. I'm just showing how your arguments could easily be applied to him as well. I mean, what additions did he add besides minor details of culture that could have easily gone to the dwarves? What was it about them that Tolkien made completely original? They are great creations, yes, but I doubt they are the utterly-original, based-on-absolutely-nothing creation you seem to want. Difference is in the details, which Cameron did
thejoexman 11 months ago
@StellarJetman And no, it's not presumptuous. Yes, we've seen this story before (and I will say that about every single film that has come out in the last few decades) but it's the best-told version of it. Every character is given motivation and reasons behind what they do, both sides are shown as having pros and cons, the hero is not immediately looking to change sides on the out-set and his reasons for changing are beliveable, and this film actually has a heart behind it. It CARES.
thejoexman 11 months ago
@thejoexman
What were the pros on the human side? What were the cons on the Na'vi side? And character motivation isn't the same as character development.
And I got that Avatar "cares". I strongly disagree with HOW it cares.
StellarJetman