Avatar: The Movie

[ifelloverboard]

YouTube- Avatar: The Movie (New Extended HD Trailer)

 

[Artifice Orisit]

This is our land? ...dude, that's not even your body.

I've been looking forward to this movie for a while now, and the more I see of it the better it looks, if maybe a bit preachy, but then I suppose everyone wants to see the good guys win.

Except me
Why must the "good guys" always win?

 

[Dormouse]

Winners write the history books. Of course they're always the 'good guys'.

 

[Artifice Orisit]

That... that actually made me feel better, thanks.

 

[RubberDucky451]

Except me
Why must the "good guys" always win?

Because the bad guys never thought of prophecy.

 

[ktp]

The hype/advertising machine behind this movie is huge. I was looking forward to it until I saw the trailer. It looks like crap. The trailer gives the whole movie away, there is nothing left to the imagination. Plus the natives look like Trolls from World of Warcraft mixed with a Cat Furry convention.

 

[flow]

I'm always skeptical of visual movies.. I'll be judging the script/score heavily.. and ignoring how cool things look (this is almost always what I do the first time I watch a movie). However, after I see it a second time I'll probably enjoy it.. at least, that's what happened with 300. First impression: Wtf, that was a dumb testosterone driven inaccurate piece of shit movie. Second impression: He fucks the shit out of his wife.. awesome.

 

[Dormouse]

Hmm, as much as I value special effects, plot, and well-written dialogue, what I'm a real sucker for is a good score. I mean, the movie can suck, but as long as it has some good pounding background music, I'll adore it. Or anything that makes me want to laugh/cry/buy a rocket launcher.
Take, for example, Pirates of the Caribean and Jumper.
I came out of both of those all

'' That was AWESOME. Now follow me, we're off to go buy 30 tons of TNT and save the world. ''

 

[walfin]

The storyline does seem quite traditional. Seems like there's some kind of political message too.

Graphics look OK though.

Wasn't there another cartoon called avatar as well?

 

[Mr.W]

I want this movie to be good, but we'll never really know until we're actually sitting in the theatre, 3d glasses in hand.
The trailer entirely underwhelmed me, which is disappointing given the months of unrelenting hype that surrounded the film before any footage was released, but I shouldn't judge a movie too heavily on the trailer alone. I respect Cameron as a director and trust him to make a good movie.

Admittedly, "This is our land" made me cringe the first time I heard it. Such an anticlimactic execution for what should have felt like a very climactic moment in the trailer.
And there is something about bipedal, human-like aliens in scifi that has always irked me.

Regardless, I'll be in line at my local imax opening night. I'm a sucker for visual feasts and after years of getting sick of cheesy CGI overuse in movies, I'm finally giddy and excited about the splendor of the real world trying to merge with the fake again. That closeup in the first minute of the trailer, of the na'vi pulling back the bow, just blew my mind. The realism and amount of detail is uncanny--unlike anything I've ever seen. It looks like it actually exists in our physical world and I can't wait to try and reach out to touch it when I see it in 3D.

I encourage everyone to watch the trailer in 1080p (http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/avatar/hd/) to see just how much detail is really there. It does bother me that the visuals don't seem to be entirely consistent throughout, though. I think the awkward movement gives it away sometimes.

 

[Kuu]

The hype/advertising machine behind this movie is huge. I was looking forward to it until I saw the trailer. It looks like crap. The trailer gives the whole movie away, there is nothing left to the imagination. Plus the natives look like Trolls from World of Warcraft mixed with a Cat Furry convention.

This.


I propose that movie trailers / hype should be banned forever.



... I wish they still did hard sci-fi movies, like the good old ones ...

 

[ifelloverboard]

The trailer gave the movie away, the graphics look okay?

You do realize when the trailer was made only half the movie was rendered so you might be right if the entire second half of the movie is the ending. (This is what I've been told.)

As for the graphics, your computer screen doesn't do it justice. This film with its 3D rendering is meant to be viewed on IMAX and I wouldn't go watch it until you can see it on IMAX. (This is what I know.)

 

[Marshmallow Moo]

I am utterly and completely hyped for this movie, but admittedly I am concerned for its blatant corniness. Fortunately for Avatar, corny movies that look great and have a decent plot are often coined as classics [see Star Wars] so it should do fine. Granted I would like a better script, but the movie looks like it will be epicly awesome.

 

[juturna]

Didn't have very high expectations before watching the flick but it was really good. Probably would appeal to people interested in transhumanism because the aliens...

Spoiler

upload themselves into nature (the forest and the animals) there are some scenes with them all connected to the ground talking to the voices of dead ancestors who are stored in the trees

 

[Decaf]

I was impressed. Very enjoyable, the storyline was only partly predictable (which is amazing considering what they had to work with) and the preachiness is muted somewhat by the disconnect from any historical reference (though they do make one statement that seems completely superfluous near the end).

I would recommend watching it.

 

[tashi]

The visual compenent of this movie was indeed impressive. The plot, not so much. I honestly don't think that it could have been more predictable. It appeared to be a new take on Pocahontas, with shiny new visuals. The movie was still good, but just don't expect to be surprised.
I would still reccomend seeing it though.

Perhaps I'm a bit biased, because it was dubbed. Portugese was my first language, but I really have not spoken, or heard it much since I was two, so I'm sure there are some things that I missed. I think I would enjoy it more if I could see it again in English.

 

[Beat Mango]

It irks me how everyone's talking about this movie - it means the massive advertising steam train behind it worked. I'll go out of my way not to see it (although I said that about Twilight and actually quite liked it). The best movie I saw this year was a small budget Sydney movie called Men's Group.

 

[Reverse Transcriptase]

My girlfriend & I saw the movie last night. I enjoyed it, but I dunno... I'm starting to think that TVtropes is killing my appreciation of everything.
It also reminded me of a few other sci-fi stories. Brutal military/corporation attacking a pure planet and it's nature-loving civilization...

Anyway, the planet tree network was pretty cool. My girlfriend loved that idea, and actually got kinda choked up about it. She's an INTP, and in her Trekkie days she wished she could be uploaded into the Borg... she loved the idea of being connected to everyone/everything. So she really liked the planet-tree-network, and the idea of being able to upload oneself into it.

But we don't have any way to do that on earth... it's a fictional sci-fi concept. Someday we might develop it, but it looks impossible. It's not an option. So she's stuck desperately wishing for something that doesn't exist.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

spoiler warning:

I just came back from the movie. It's gorgeous in 3D. I didn't really like the main character very much; as he had a very frat boy air to him (the whole reason he was designed that way seemed to be so he would appeal to masses, while the 'scientists' were degraded). Though he did get more somewhat more bearable in the second half. I really like Neitiri's character, and I was very relieved she avoided chickification. Characterization was a rather weak point in the film though.

There were several shameless plot devices, the one the bugged me the most was about the school; used to justify the English speaking Na'vi. Also the way they killed off a character just to show that a mind could be uploaded; that whole concept could have been handled a lot better. Admittedly the most shameless of them all, the 'unobtainium,' made me laugh.

While it had some problems, in general, I thought this movie was very good. Simply one of the most beautiful and visually artistic movies I've ever seen. The cgi is simply amazing; the creatures, the na'vi, and the otherworldly forest never looked fake or cheesy. I also really enjoyed the aircraft design.

My favorite aspect of the movie had to be dragon/wyvern creatures. I really wish I had one.

edit:
The 'horses' look like they were designed after Sleipnir!

 

[Decaf]

Spoiler

Also the way they killed off a character just to show that a mind could be uploaded

I hated that part. When it first happened I thought, "huh, maybe they're actually gonna do something unpredictable." When they brought it back out at the end it completely invalidated everything positive about the previous moment. I had forgotten that when I said it had avoided being all-encompassingly predictable. I take it back.

I almost fell in love with the scenery. Vegetation that glows when disturbed makes sense because it would allow predators to see the animals trying to eat it, and thus protect the plant. Those little heli-lizards were terrible though. They destroyed my sense of immersion. Take a small animal with no defenses and make it float lazily through the air on a big glowing circle... that's what wolves call popcorn.

My favorite aspect of the movie had to be dragon/wyvern creatures. I really wish I had one.

You should definitely read His Majesty's Dragon then

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Spoiler

I hated that part. When it first happened I thought, "huh, maybe they're actually gonna do something unpredictable." When they brought it back out at the end it completely invalidated everything positive about the previous moment. I had forgotten that when I said it had avoided being all-encompassingly predictable. I take it back.

I pretty much predicted everything with the 'uploading' when they compared Pandora to a brain. That scene just took all the subtlety out of it. It would have been better if they'd just took a bit more time in the ending, instead of cutting off as they did.

It's beginning to bug me how much aliens are portrayed as racial minorities though. Make your aliens actually alien, not Native American and not African (as with District 9). It was nice to see so much alien culture when that often gets overlooked, but I just wish it had been actually Alien........

I almost fell in love with the scenery. Vegetation that glows when disturbed makes sense because it would allow predators to see the animals trying to eat it, and thus protect the plant.

I thought the glowing signaled how the creatures and plants were interconnected. Almost as a side effect of being a part of the natural network. The scenery was absolutely beautiful though, especially at night.

Those little heli-lizards were terrible though. They destroyed my sense of immersion. Take a small animal with no defenses and make it float lazily through the air on a big glowing circle... that's what wolves call popcorn.

Well things like this exist and it's almost as ridiculous.

 

[Darby]

The visual compenent of this movie was indeed impressive. The plot, not so much. I honestly don't think that it could have been more predictable. It appeared to be a new take on Pocahontas, with shiny new visuals. The movie was still good, but just don't expect to be surprised.
I would still reccomend seeing it though.

This pretty much summed it up for me, I thought the first 3/4 of the movie was awesome, and then the last 1/4 was...well....not so awesome.

 

[Kuu]

Spoiler

It's beginning to bug me how much aliens are portrayed as racial minorities though. Make your aliens actually alien, not Native American and not African (as with District 9). It was nice to see so much alien culture when that often gets overlooked, but I just wish it had been actually Alien........

Spoiler

My brother sent me this link earlier today dealing with that precise subject heh.

 

[fullerene]

Just because of their normal use on this forum, I almost absent-mindedly stated clicking the spoiler tags before I had to remind myself that yes, this is actually a thread about a movie I haven't seen yet.

 

[Agent Intellect]

Just because of their normal use on this forum, I almost absent-mindedly stated clicking the spoiler tags before I had to remind myself that yes, this is actually a thread about a movie I haven't seen yet.

I read all the spoilers, and the above link, and I didn't really read too much that I couldn't pick up or infer on my own just from seeing the movie trailers/commercials.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

Well, at least someone disliked this movie. I mostly agree with Spoony and I'm glad he disliked the movie, as I probably won't be able to see it in cinema.

 

[Cryss Winters]

It was EPIC. (and I rarely use that word seriously)

 

[jhbowden]

The entire concept of this movie reminds me of the video game Civilization, when on occasion, even after I would tech up, acquire the strategic resources, etc. etc. a single spearman would keep destroying my Panzers. Should. Not. Ever. Happen. GRR!

The sermon right now is deterring me from seeing it. What's wrong with exploiting nature? I don't see the problem with civilized peoples imposing their ways on savages and barbarians either. While too many today take primitivism (environmentalism + multiculturalism) as an ideal, my dystopia indeed is a primitivist society where we all have green jobs, like handling manure and riding animals. (I hate working with my hands.) This actually puts nightmares such as 1984 and Brave New World in a positive light, since they at least have the merit of science and technology.

So if I do choose to see Avatar, I'll be hoping for a high smurf body count.

 

[Jennywocky]

It was EPIC. (and I rarely use that word seriously)

OMG. I saw it in 3D... one of the best cinematic experiences of my life.

The story pattern/plot itself was an old standard (a la Disney's "Pocahontas") but I think this is the most successful version of that style narrative I've ever experienced.

If you can shell out the money, I would definitely see it in 3D in the theater.

The sermon right now is deterring me from seeing it. What's wrong with exploiting nature? I don't see the problem with civilized peoples imposing their ways on savages and barbarians either. While too many today take primitivism (environmentalism + multiculturalism) as an ideal, my dystopia indeed is a primitivist society where we all have green jobs, like handling manure and riding animals. (I hate working with my hands.) This actually puts nightmares such as 1984 and Brave New World in a positive light, since they at least have the merit of science and technology.

There wasn't much issue with that, actually; it was more the incoming civ was willing to bomb the shit out of the local natives and destroy everything the indigenous culture valued just to get a particular deposit of minerals. They were also given another option of natural resources to exploit that would not have damaged the culture in question but chose to dismiss/reject it due to presumed lack of imagination and cultural hubris.

I don't believe in the "noble savages" Rousseau seemed to perceive, but there was definitely beauty in this alien culture that was crushed underfoot needlessly and callously. I'll stand against that any day.

So if I do choose to see Avatar, I'll be hoping for a high smurf body count.

Then you'll be pleased. There was a lot of mowing down / carnage in the final battle sequence.

The Na'vi could have eaten Ewoks for breakfast.

I just came back from the movie. It's gorgeous in 3D. I didn't really like the main character very much; as he had a very frat boy air to him (the whole reason he was designed that way seemed to be so he would appeal to masses, while the 'scientists' were degraded). Though he did get more somewhat more bearable in the second half. I really like Neitiri's character, and I was very relieved she avoided chickification.

Neytiri rocked. She was my favorite character in the movie... although I actually liked the badass Miles too.

I agree that the lead was the weakest in the movie, in terms of complexity of character and line delivery. He wasn't bad, but he didn't match the delivery of some of the other supporting cast.

Characterization was a rather weak point in the film though.

I'm not sure what you were expecting. Based on other movies in the genre, this movie surpassed them. "The Remains of the Day" this is not, and it was pretty standard fare for Cameron movies, and especially one designed to rake in money in an American audience.

There were several shameless plot devices, the one the bugged me the most was about the school; used to justify the English speaking Na'vi. Also the way they killed off a character just to show that a mind could be uploaded; that whole concept could have been handled a lot better.

Why? It was clearly her own individual character arc at play here, and what she wanted. Cameron's actually a master at not pulling Deux es Machine crap in his movies, he actually foreshadows everything that will happen later. Even the way the battle was finally won, the way that Jake won back his people's trust, etc., was foreshadowed earlier in the movie; there were no "geez, where did THAT come from moment?" He approached it all honesty, including the scene you are describing.

As far as the English-speaking school, the movie was already 2.5 hours long. That "solution" was chosen so that time and resources could be spent developing other aspects of the plot. How else would you have handled it, that would have allowed an English speaking audience more emotional connection with a foreign people, and what would you have sacrificed in the process? (Just wondering.) To judge a movie, you have to understand the priorities of the director and the narrative, then see if the choices made align with that.

My favorite aspect of the movie had to be dragon/wyvern creatures. I really wish I had one.

They were cool, and I liked that while they were pretty, they were still pretty scary.

The 'horses' look like they were designed after Sleipnir!

Ha, didn't even notice... but yes, you're totally right. So cool.

 

[Irishpenguin]

Great. Just great. Jennywocky, your post has just greatly tempted me to go see the movie just so I can answer some of those questions about how I would have gone about doing things instead of what the movie people did....grrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[Seducer of the Homeless]

so yeah, aesthetically it looked good

but the movie itself? hilariously cliched, i have to say the "political and social commentary" is rather infantile so don't presume it has intelligence when people say this, typical big blockbuster really - 5/10 (not a 3 purely because the fight at the end was slightly entertaining)

 

[Jennywocky]

Great. Just great. Jennywocky, your post has just greatly tempted me to go see the movie just so I can answer some of those questions about how I would have gone about doing things instead of what the movie people did....grrrrrrrrrrrr

Disclosure: I'm an understudy for Lucifer. Explain anything?

.... honestly, I'd like to hear your ideas. I write stories as well, and writing is greatly a practice of brainstorming and problem-solving... The things you raised are part of the typical various narrative "problems" that need to be resolved satisfactorily and fairly if one is to maintain a sense of reality.

The "language" issue is a sticky one. I found the "solution" in The 13th Warrior to be far cheesier... it was so clearly a "let's get THAT out of the way" resolution than at least one that made sense. In Avatar, there's a lot based on the white man's push into Indian or native territory, and how it all usually began by missionaries entering the culture and providing a service like teaching the natives their language.... here we have scientists, but it's the same concept. It's a tried and true method, so it didn't seem that cheap to me... and meanwhile it freed up much of the movie to focus on OTHER things.... other solutions like continual subtitles (Apocalypto) have their own plusses and minuses.

We see this in lit too -- books that create their own language force readers to invest energy into parsing the new syntax, energy that cannot be used to engage in other ways; if the language used is important, then maybe that energy investment is necessary, otherwise energy should be allocated toward the important parts of the narrative in the author's mind.

I mean, I find it sort of cheesy in LotR that hobbits in Bag End and men in Minas Tirith speak the same language since apparently for centuries/decades the two cultures were separate... but none of us question it. And to answer that question or waste time explaining why they can still understand each other despite the lengthy separation of the cultures would have been a diversion. not as great an example, but my point there is that none of us even thought about that question and yet still found the narrative enjoyable; we just assumed they could all speak the same language because they lived in the same world. Here, the worlds were different, so the language barrier had to be addressed.

(babel fish, where are ya?)

but the movie itself? hilariously cliched, i have to say the "political and social commentary" is rather infantile so don't presume it has intelligence when people say this, typical big blockbuster really - 5/10 (not a 3 purely because the fight at the end was slightly entertaining)

I'm in the middle on that one... but I took my INFP to see it last night, and for the first ten minutes of the car ride home he just launched into this brutal recollection (with historical detail and relevance) of how the white man pushed Native Americans out of their natural land, comments on the Little House on the Prairie book series and how childishly prejudicial they are against the Indians, etc.... far more detail than I had paid attention to before. I was sort of floored by the vehemence AND detail of his reaction... because i felt like the movie version was more surface-level too.

(Because, after all, probably one of its worst traits is that it is a very typical American blockbuster style film, which usually demands that nuances get sacrificed to hit the larger less-educated markets.)

... so I guess I am saying that maybe here on an INTP intensive forum, the movie had some critical weaknesses, but I'm thinking for a lot of other sorts of people it was an amazing experience.

 

[Irishpenguin]

It's interesting to see how much this language situation correlates to me trying to write a story I've had going for a while now. I ran into this same obstacle since my story involves multiple planets as well. I've had several thoughts in the work as to how to get past this. Some were good thoughts, others not so good. The point is that I know a little about trying to get past this subject without seeming to "Cheesy" or "Cliche", and I know that it's not exactly an "easy" thing to go about doing. Then I again the thought came up that what I have been working on is a book, in which people are accustomed to loads of detail and in-depth answers to such trivial things. Wheras movies can't afford to go to such depth and sacrifice precious time for small things. All in all I do have to agree with you JennyWocky that most people won't care if a piece of entertainment doesn't address language (such as you mentioned with LotR). Just as long as people can understand what the hell people are saying and are kept in to loop of what is going on so far. so.......yup.

*Note: I read over this and was reminded of the quirk that INTP's tend to have when it knowing a lot of different ways to go about doing something, but yet have considerable trouble on deciding on which one to acutally do......guess this is that special quirk at work.....whoa that rhymed.

 

[Seducer of the Homeless]

I'm in the middle on that one... but I took my INFP to see it last night, and for the first ten minutes of the car ride home he just launched into this brutal recollection (with historical detail and relevance) of how the white man pushed Native Americans out of their natural land, comments on the Little House on the Prairie book series and how childishly prejudicial they are against the Indians, etc.... far more detail than I had paid attention to before. I was sort of floored by the vehemence AND detail of his reaction... because i felt like the movie version was more surface-level too.

(Because, after all, probably one of its worst traits is that it is a very typical American blockbuster style film, which usually demands that nuances get sacrificed to hit the larger less-educated markets.)

... so I guess I am saying that maybe here on an INTP intensive forum, the movie had some critical weaknesses, but I'm thinking for a lot of other sorts of people it was an amazing experience.

i am INFP more than INTP, but that doesn't make me an idiot

it was too Blockbuster for my tastes as you mentioned, the social commentary was...it was something a teenager would write, lamenting after his history lesson in high school (an idiots way, like my classmates last year hearing about Hitler's atrocities - "...but isn't that kind of racist?" in total shock )

but yeah, i apologise, but i would be far less overtly critical if the movie wasn't so damn hyped and critically acclaimed, things which it deserves no more than any other shallow blockbuster hit (which are also crap, but never mind...)



also, on another less serious level, i refuse to be amazed by this because in 20/30yrs time i don't intend to look like an idiot because this "amazing experience" has been far surpassed child says innocently "daddy, why did people back then think Avatar was amazing? where they stupid or something?"

 

[del]

The movie was absolutely awesome, but the storyline did lack subtlety. I wasn't expecting it to be Faust or anything though -- I mean this is a Hollywood movie we're talking about here.

It definitely could have been better, but I haven't seen a mainstream movie this good in a long, long time.

 

[Jennywocky]

i am INFP more than INTP, but that doesn't make me an idiot

it was too Blockbuster for my tastes as you mentioned, the social commentary was...it was something a teenager would write, lamenting after his history lesson in high school (an idiots way, like my classmates last year hearing about Hitler's atrocities - "...but isn't that kind of racist?" in total shock )

but yeah, i apologise, but i would be far less overtly critical if the movie wasn't so damn hyped and critically acclaimed, things which it deserves no more than any other shallow blockbuster hit (which are also crap, but never mind...)

I'm left feeling like much of the negative responses to this movie are reactions against the positive wave that drove initial comments. Typical angst-filled growsing.

I mean, come on. I've seen crap blockbusters before, and with lousy performances. There's a lot of various merits to this movie, both from a technical standpoint, a design aspect, and an acting standpoint for some of the cast, among other things... Even the soundtrack isn't bad on its own, it does what it needs to do during the picture; the worst part of it is simply that it's pretty much just a bastardization of Horner's prior works (Braveheart mixed with Titanic), so we've heard it all before, so it comes off as bland nowadays.

We're pretty damned jaded nowadays, aren't we, as a culture? Cameron did a pretty amazing job pulling a lot of this together, and I doubt anyone on this forum even has the raw talent or skill or organizational ability to do even a quarter of the job he did here... all weaknesses aside. Let's keep things in context.

I hate how I feel sort of painted into a corner of defending a movie in which I did see some flaws and wish some things had been different. But where has the vision gone in our culture? Jaded, jaded, jaded. We need to be able to recognize beauty amid dross when we find it, and there were some moments in this film that were beautiful... which is why some people are responding to it... NOT because it's merely a "blockbuster."

If we lose the ability to recognize levels of merit just because we can also make some critical comments about a work of art, then I think our culture is really a lot worse off than I originally thought. I really dislike "broad side of the barn" criticisms that show a lack of distinction or nuance.

also, on another less serious level, i refuse to be amazed by this because in 20/30yrs time i don't intend to look like an idiot because this "amazing experience" has been far surpassed child says innocently "daddy, why did people back then think Avatar was amazing? where they stupid or something?"

It would certainly be karma, wouldn't it?

 

[fullerene]

yah... I just watched it a few days ago, and I absolutely loved it too, for a bunch of reasons.

1. Obviously the aesthetics... by far the most outstanding part of the movie. I can't see how anyone could think it was anything but gorgeous.

2. Characterizing the setting. I don't just mean the aesthetics here, but the same visual environment made you think different things, depending on how he portrayed it.

Spoiler

In the beginning, they highly emphasized the hostility of the environment. The first few beasts were large and violent, plants dissolved back into their shell defensively when touched, the air was poisonous, and when the main character got stranded at night, those little dog things attacked him viciously. As he started to learn about it, the beauty of the forest was emphasized. The ground lit up while the characters walked on it, the plants glowed rather than immediately retreating when touched, and the same dogs that initially attacked him were shown playing with each other peacefully.

It reminded me of how a person can look at a rat and think "pest in the house, kill it!", or they can scatter crumbs out and watch them eat. When a rat eats, it looks almost like a miniature kangaroo--one of the cutest things in the world, nibbling on food they hold with their little paws--but you'll miss it if you think of them as pests to be exterminated rather than pets to enjoy. I thought this movie captured that facet of nature quite well.

YouTube- White rat eating rice snack

3. The way he used the "open slate" of an alien race, with no prior human contact, to draw out the flaws in things that most humans take for granted, reminds me of what I loved so much about "Out of the Silent Planet" (C.S. Lewis), one of the few books I've actually read cover to cover.

Spoiler

I couldn't help but give a big grin when the aliens found out he was a soldier, instead of a scientist, and exclaimed "then perhaps he can be cured of his insanity" (or something like that). Not only that, but the story/setting/aliens were written in such a way that you could literally see how they would think he were insane, if you were honest about it, because there really was a connection between all life on the planet that they grew up familiar with, and you would have to be insane to act like the humans were. Mining the planet for resources would be like cutting off your own arm to sell it.

I almost thought the exact opposite of what that site someone linked earlier did; their main problem with it seemed to be that, although the aliens were clearly Indian, it was turned into a white-guilt movie. Personally, I sort of think that's bullshit--it applies to those who fit its patterns, and if you feel guilty, that's likely your conscience. Stop avoiding admitting that he has a point and you, along with the rest of humanity, do this sort of thing a lot.


hmm... I know there was more than that, but I can't think of it at the moment. My brother's watching TV in the room, and I can't think at all while it's going on.

 

[Polaris]

It reminded me of how a person can look at a rat and think "pest in the house, kill it!", or they can scatter crumbs out and watch them eat. When a rat eats, it looks almost like a miniature kangaroo--one of the cutest things in the world, nibbling on food they hold with their little paws--but you'll miss it if you think of them as pests to be exterminated rather than pets to enjoy. I thought this movie captured that facet of nature quite well.

I like that.......that is your view upon the animals and insects we tend to assign the brand. I'm an all animals fan, including cockroaches, ants, eels, snakes, mice, rats and spiders. Whenever a hand-sized spider casually walks into my house, I put it in a jar (easier said than done....and one day it may go terribly wrong... ) and kindly dispose of it outside. The other night we had a huge wolf spider in the lounge room, and I felt like a ninja turtle/Kung-Fu hero trying to wrestle the thing into my jar. My partner refuses to do it. Keeps me on my toes and is certainly more entertaining than TV.....

You're making me want to go and see this movie now......that rat is a better ad for it than the original......

 

[Polaris]

Was that a derailment or what.........

 

[fullerene]

hehe, a bit. Sorry I just didn't respond.

My girlfriend is a lot like that too. It's the cutest thing, watching her blow ants off of the silverware before she sticks it in the dishwasher! I was actually growing to hate most animal-lovers, just because they seem to either 1. cared more about animals (and animal abuse) than people (/people abuse), or 2. only cared about the cute animals. That is one way where the gf definitely helped me, because she toed both of those lines and showed me that there's a respectable/non-hypocritical amount of care that you can have for animals... which made me start to come around myself.

 

[Polaris]

hehe, a bit. Sorry I just didn't respond.

My girlfriend is a lot like that too. It's the cutest thing, watching her blow ants off of the silverware before she sticks it in the dishwasher! I was actually growing to hate most animal-lovers, just because they seem to either 1. cared more about animals (and animal abuse) than people (/people abuse), or 2. only cared about the cute animals. That is one way where the gf definitely helped me, because she toed both of those lines and showed me that there's a respectable/non-hypocritical amount of care that you can have for animals... which made me start to come around myself.

That is ok, Crypt, I don't really expect anyone to respond as such....I just have the tendency to go off on a tangent. I too get irritated by people who seem to care more about animal-abuse. I wonder if that is due to the fact that these people perceive animals to be more innocent, and are therefore less deserving of abuse? Argh....tangent again. I'll stop now. Yes, I'll go and see Avatar, no matter how much the ad annoyed me, and the fact that it is made by the same guy who did Titanic, and a Hollywood-production.

 

[Sparrow]

The plot was weak and predictable, but that's not why people paid to watch it.

 

[RubberDucky451]

The only thing worse then the storyline was the font.

 

[brain enclosed in flesh]

I like that.......that is your view upon the animals and insects we tend to assign the brand. I'm an all animals fan, including cockroaches, ants, eels, snakes, mice, rats and spiders. Whenever a hand-sized spider casually walks into my house, I put it in a jar (easier said than done....and one day it may go terribly wrong... ) and kindly dispose of it outside. The other night we had a huge wolf spider in the lounge room, and I felt like a ninja turtle/Kung-Fu hero trying to wrestle the thing into my jar. My partner refuses to do it. Keeps me on my toes and is certainly more entertaining than TV.....

You're making me want to go and see this movie now......that rat is a better ad for it than the original......

Yeah, Polaris! Me too! Fellow insect rescuers UNITE!

True, as well, about the rat

Although it still isn't enough to convince me to go see it. I'm with sed on this...

 

[Seducer of the Homeless]

i am not merely being angst-ridden towards this movie because everyone else loves it. but does nobody see the irony of the messages anti-modern man, shallow disregard for nature and money making commercialism and industrialism in a movie that costs £300 million?

anyway, sorry to sound so hostile

lol, i save creatures too ever since i brutally...ahem, amputated a few of a spiders legs in front of lots of kids in order to look cool as a young child, i have made it my mission that if i come across a small creature i will help/save it. i am still haunted by that spider i hurt....

 

[fullerene]

but does nobody see the irony of the messages anti-modern man, shallow disregard for nature and money making commercialism and industrialism in a movie that costs £300 million?

as embarrassing as it is to admit, I actually did not.

This changed my opinion considerably (not being sarcastic). I'm a little bit ticked off now, both at them and myself.

 

[RubberDucky451]

i am not merely being angst-ridden towards this movie because everyone else loves it. but does nobody see the irony of the messages anti-modern man, shallow disregard for nature and money making commercialism and industrialism in a movie that costs £300 million?

anyway, sorry to sound so hostile

lol, i save creatures too ever since i brutally...ahem, amputated a few of a spiders legs in front of lots of kids in order to look cool as a young child, i have made it my mission that if i come across a small creature i will help/save it. i am still haunted by that spider i hurt....

Yes! I'm asking myself, "Why don't you like this movie? It received good ratings, everyone loved it!". I just really dislike it. I'm not anti trend!

Or the fact that the environment was mostly CGI? Save the fake forest!

 

[Jennywocky]

Or the fact that the environment was mostly CGI? Save the fake forest!

Hey, think of all the weeks/months it took to grow that fake forest!

The loss of Home Tree was the loss of eighteen months of painstaking virtual-deciduous growth!

as embarrassing as it is to admit, I actually did not. This changed my opinion considerably (not being sarcastic). I'm a little bit ticked off now, both at them and myself.

It's okay, you'll get over it.

It's part of the typical paradox of being part of a preachy capitalist culture, we're all horribly tainted.
The root problem: Those without money have no power.

 

[Words]

i am not merely being angst-ridden towards this movie because everyone else loves it. but does nobody see the irony of the messages anti-modern man, shallow disregard for nature and money making commercialism and industrialism in a movie that costs £300 million?

anyway, sorry to sound so hostile

lol, i save creatures too ever since i brutally...ahem, amputated a few of a spiders legs in front of lots of kids in order to look cool as a young child, i have made it my mission that if i come across a small creature i will help/save it. i am still haunted by that spider i hurt....

AH..same opinion and same experience, except I did it to grasshoppers. why was i doing that?

 

[fullerene]

It's okay, you'll get over it.

It's part of the typical paradox of being part of a preachy capitalist culture, we're all horribly tainted.
The root problem: Those without money have no power.

Yeah, I mean, I know you're right. And it's not like the writer or director put up all the money--it was the studio that did that. That was pretty bad at first glance, though.