Avatar trailer (new James Cameron movie)

Kagemaru_H said:

I'd say having Asperger's Syndrome eliminates the "normal" part, but the rest is true.

I DEMAND you from here on, type in caps.

Kagemaru_H said:

It's just like someone going into a suicidal depression because his hard drive got fried in the middle of a World of Warcraft session.

I don't think it's like that.

Yeah. I'd probably say it's like if every WoW server was shut off to compensate for Diablo 3 and people went into depression over losing WoW.

I still say no. These people are depressed because something fictional is not a reality. They can go see the movie as many times as they want. They just can't go and visit Pandora.

If you want a WoW analogy it's as simple as saying "I can't be a Night Elf so I'm gonna off myself."

Kagemaru_H said:

I'd say having Asperger's Syndrome eliminates the "normal" part, but the rest is true.

Oh please.

It was enjoyable. Complaining about unoriginal story is pretty ridiculous. Obviously the basic idea has been done before, there was at least a few original, if minor, ideas. On that note, the following would involve spoilers if they weren't glaringly obvious since the beginning of the film.

What I liked:

- The imagery. Not specifically the CGI, which was effective and not overdone. I'm talking about all visual components. The angles and shot composition were wonderful, and the jungle world was very cool and well constructed.

- The message. Sorry, I am a dirty hippie, and I love trees. I also love seeing the asshole general get his ass handed to him, but it would have been better if the corporate buttmunch was brutally killed because he was far more annoying. Also, it was cool that they chose a hoo-rah jarhead to turn to nature's side or whatever. Makes it accessible to those type :P

- The action as well as other 'physical' scenes (exploration, etc). Cavalry charge could have been better but it is quite satisfying when those hammerhead motherfuckers save the day.

What I didn't care for:

- The characters. Not very substantial.
- The happy-go-lucky falling in love, becoming a part of their tribe, and so on. I'm not saying it shouldn't have happened but it felt like "oh we have to put this in the movie so here it is!" rather than having any kind of twist involved.
- That goddamn corporate buttmunch. Other characters show how the humans didn't care about the na'vi and company, and saw them as savage, and it was fine. But this guy was basically just offensive (such as calling the creatures "the blue monkeys") and he didn't get a cruel, gut-wrenching death. His character could only be legitimate if he got torn limb from limb. But it's a family movie....


It's campy, and it's all about the naturalist message. So don't watch it if you take movies really fucking seriously or if you love global warming.

DuckReconMajor said:

If you want a WoW analogy it's as simple as saying "I can't do a Night Elf so I'm gonna jack off myself."

FTFY

There are some people out there who are so deluded they believe they are a Na'vi (Called Na'vikin, see mediakin and otakukin for other lovely examples)

This nonsense and the drama created over this from other communities made me lose all potential interest in checking the movie out.

magicsofa said:

- That goddamn corporate buttmunch. Other characters show how the humans didn't care about the na'vi and company, and saw them as savage, and it was fine. But this guy was basically just offensive (such as calling the creatures "the blue monkeys") and he didn't get a cruel, gut-wrenching death. His character could only be legitimate if he got torn limb from limb. But it's a family movie....

That guy was the best, he didn't die at all if I remember right.

Anyway before I saw this I wasn't too interested since I assumed it would be just a boring interspecies love story. The "James Cameron's Pocahontas" picture made me want to see it even less. But it turns out at least half the things there didn't even happen in the movie. After seeing it though I thought it was a great.

Is it just me or did anyone else not notice the massive glaring continuity error in the final scene?

Just another reason this is a shitty movie. I hate awards ceremonies *grumble grumble grumble*

Maes said:

FTFY

One is not a man until he's fapped to every WoW race.

DuckReconMajor said:

One is not a man until he's fapped to every WoW race.

Does furry and futa count?

Technician said:

Does furry and futa count?

WoW ain't Second Life ;-)

...oh wait...

Watching just a trailer online won't do this movie justice. I watched this last weekend in an IMAX theatre. You know, with the 3D glasses and stuff. And it's pretty amazing, like you're actually right there. Like you can actually touch the objects in front of you. It wasn't just me though, the whole audience was wow'ing for the first 15m.

Yeah, so the plot is simple and there's not much character development going on etc etc but it's still enjoyable to watch. And do watch it in IMAX or you'll be missing out.

I find it somewhat ironic that the only arguments for seeing the movie are for the visual effects. This is a website devoted to a 16 year old game. Presumably everyone is here because they value gameplay over visuals, yet when it comes to movies apparently visuals are enough to overcome any flaws.

That's because movies and games are two entirely different things. Biggest thing: movies don't have gameplay (avoids PS3 joke). There are plenty of people out there listening to pop-radio who dig a movie like Rear Window or something of the sort.

Also, there are plenty of people on this board who don't keep their gaming DOOM exclusive or were originally captured by Doom when it first came out because of its technology.

Technician said:

Does furry and futa count?

Yes, necro too.

david_a said:

I find it somewhat ironic that the only arguments for seeing the movie are for the visual effects. This is a website devoted to a 16 year old game. Presumably everyone is here because they value gameplay over visuals, yet when it comes to movies apparently visuals are enough to overcome any flaws.

1. You want to express your like for the movie, yet still want to feel smarter than others.
   
2. You don't want to be one of those "party poopers" so you try to point out something good about a movie everyone else is watching.
   
3. You want to make everyone else's criticisms of the movie less valid.

I don't mind people watching the movie for the visuals. But I'm tired of being told I should enjoy a movie for some visuals I didn't even find that impressive.

Besides, if there was some no-name movie that had stunning visuals to make up for its boring and uninteresting plot, no one would give a crap.

Snakes said:

That's because movies and games are two entirely different things.

No they're not. Both are legitimate forms of media, with countless parallels between the two. Sure, people are going to enjoy different things from each media, because there are differences between them, but that doesn't make one superior to the other.

I really like a good plot in a movie, while with Doom and other games I don't care about the plot after the first playthrough, and I play over and over again because of the gameplay, (and with some games the heaps and heaps of new maps to explore).

Now I am often interested in a movie's visuals, especially if they go with a pretty good or great plot.

This movie is a weird case: It had amazing visuals in my eyes and I would have loved to watch it as a documentary on PBS, without a plot. But I feel like it could have benefited from a slightly better story. Though as it is, I agree with all the movie's messages and morals and identify with the characters. So I suppose the story would drag it down even more for the city-loving, buisness-minded, cynical people, or something like that...

While I certainly enjoyed the stunning visuals, I saw past the plot not because of the visuals but because I viewed this more as an action movie.

zap610 said:

That guy was the best, he didn't die at all if I remember right.

That's the problem, he didn't die. And he was the worst. He obviously caused the entire problem. He failed at everything he tried to do. His lines were laughable. His face, punchable. I guess I just love to hate him.

phi108 said:

Though as it is, I agree with all the movie's messages and morals and identify with the characters.

I don't. I personally think the messages and morals were bullshit. Not that they're necessarily wrong, but the whole premise of the morale was so contrived or constructed that the whole illusion of the movie broke for me. The characters were all one-dimensional with the exception of the "business man" who obviously had an internal battle going. The message was what? Take care of nature and nature will take care of you? Duh. Is that really an interesting point to make anymore? It has been beaten to death already. The question of "why" was not explored enough to claim that the movie had a valid message or morale. It was simply too flat and straight-forward with a definite lack of reflection, cynicism or realism.

I still loved the movie for its visuals that were worth every penny.

Mr. Chris said:

There are some people out there who are so deluded they believe they are a Na'vi (Called Na'vikin, see mediakin and otakukin for other lovely examples)

This nonsense and the drama created over this from other communities made me lose all potential interest in checking the movie out.

What, are you afraid?

Shaviro said:

I personally think the messages and morals were bullshit.

Avatar's message: Don't bother fighting for the environment, natives will band together and save the day!

It's true that the movie showed no representation at all of resource management - which is something the "businessman" might actually care about. You don't actually see the circle of life happening really, or at least not in detail. It didn't really show the Na'vi being particularly harmonious with their environment, except that they hunted with those flying dudes, which I found to be kind of strange since they can hunt on their own. Oh well...this is why I don't watch many typical hollywood movies

printz said:

What, are you afraid?

Nope, it simply made me lose any lingering interest to see it. Also, the plot doesn't seem very original with pretty visuals to make it overlooked.

Just like some say gameplay is more important than graphics, I'd say the same for movies...abundant and spectacular graphics and graphical effects will not make up for an unoriginal storyline.

Mr. Chris said:

Just like some say gameplay is more important than graphics, I'd say the same for movies...abundant and spectacular graphics and graphical effects will not make up for an unoriginal storyline.

Here's my thought on this. Did I enjoy this movie enough not to lament the loss of 8 bucks? Well, the plot wasn't worth the 8 bucks I put into it, but I'm here to be entertained, damn it! And boy was I entertained. I can enjoy a bad game (like Silent Hill 2) if I'm entertained enough by it. Silent Hill 2 had the benefit of having a good story and great atmosphere, making up for the horrendous gameplay. Similarly with Avatar, the plot and characters can go fuck themselves, what's important is the ride. Also, it's not that it's a bad plot. We've just seen it before.

I agree.

I agree as well. Not all productions have to be depth-filled, life-changing adventures. Both games and movies can be good solely based on the visuals and effects. Crysis is a pretty crappy game, but the graphics makes it worth my while.

Dragon's Lair, anyone?