Avatar

[Gen. Sosabowski]

Heh... I'm taking my gf to see this. Who cares about the length

I'm now an older man. Trust me, pay attention to the length of bad movies that you talk her into seeing. As the Bible says, "it will be paid back, threefold..."

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

Guess I'll save my money for something else instead.

Don't even rent it. Earmark $5 towards the ASL account. If anyone in your family complains, refer them to me. Like Titanic, this is not only a waste of time, but a tragic waste of the human spirit.

 

[Dr Zaius]

I saw it the other day. You can read my comments here.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Don't even rent it. Earmark $5 towards the ASL account. If anyone in your family complains, refer them to me. Like Titanic, this is not only a waste of time, but a tragic waste of the human spirit.

I enjoyed Titanic. The visuals were great, they did their research (mostly - the controversy about the pistol-waving crewman did illicit a formal apology), and there was at least a semblance of a story to it. Billy Zane was a bit of a mustachio-twirler in that one, too, sure, but it was at least believable. David Warner is always good though he's largely misused in this one.

It certainly wasn't the greatest movie ever, but - I have no idea if this applies to you or not, so this is a general comment only - I suspect there are some historical gaming buffs, for example, who are never going to fully appreciate a film that sets out to do something other than tell a historical battle recreation. Personally, I try and keep my mind open to all kinds of stories. I'm not about to dismiss Titanic simply because I don't like those types of movies to begin with. For what it set out to do - tell a romantic/human interest story with a historical disaster as a backdrop - it was done adequately. There was suspense, there were funny moments, there was drama, and there was not a conventional "happy ending" or - worse, I find, with American movies - conventional satisfying ending brought about by gunplay where the heroine shoots the bad guy and suffers no consequences.

Compared to Pearl Harbor, which was the same "genre" (romance/human interest transposed over historical disaster), I think it is no contest. Neither one is Gone With The Wind, no arguments, but that one has been done, and to be honest, I've never seen GWTW.

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

I enjoyed Titanic. The visuals were great, they did their research (mostly - the controversy about the pistol-waving crewman did illicit a formal apology), and there was at least a semblance of a story to it. Billy Zane was a bit of a mustachio-twirler in that one, too, sure, but it was at least believable. David Warner is always good though he's largely misused in this one.

It certainly wasn't the greatest movie ever, but - I have no idea if this applies to you or not, so this is a general comment only - I suspect there are some historical gaming buffs, for example, who are never going to fully appreciate a film that sets out to do something other than tell a historical battle recreation. Personally, I try and keep my mind open to all kinds of stories. I'm not about to dismiss Titanic simply because I don't like those types of movies to begin with. For what it set out to do - tell a romantic/human interest story with a historical disaster as a backdrop - it was done adequately. There was suspense, there were funny moments, there was drama, and there was not a conventional "happy ending" or - worse, I find, with American movies - conventional satisfying ending brought about by gunplay where the heroine shoots the bad guy and suffers no consequences.

Compared to Pearl Harbor, which was the same "genre" (romance/human interest transposed over historical disaster), I think it is no contest. Neither one is Gone With The Wind, no arguments, but that one has been done, and to be honest, I've never seen GWTW.

Most of the technical aspects of Titanic are beyond reproach, such as the art and music direction.

The basic narrative of Titanic is a hopeless mess. The movie would be much better by editing out about 20-30 minutes. The repeated shots of drowning shanty Irish beating on steerage bulkheads account for nearly six minutes of running time alone. The framing story is totally extraneous and heavy-handed. (If you can't make your point in a running time of over 2 hours, you've done something radically wrong.)

I call it a tragic waste of the human spirit, because the moral compass of the movie doesn't exactly point North. As you mention, the heroine's only regret is that she didn't wind up with the poor stud of her choice.

To be fair, my real problem is it's not my kind of movie. Disaster movies belong in the dark smelly basement of cinema, along with movies adapted from video games and t.v. sitcoms.

 

[wrongway149]

I'm now an older man. Trust me, pay attention to the length of bad movies that you talk her into seeing. As the Bible says, "it will be paid back, threefold..."

Well mine talked me into seeing 'The Hangover' over the weekend, which she rented. Both of us heard it was funny. :kotz:

I would have rather watched 'Mars Attacks' or 'The Life of Brian;' for the thirtieth time...

 

[pward]

I haven't seen it yet, but I was involved in some "post movie" banter with some gamers that have.

We reached a general consensus that the Earth forces that will reply to the destruction of the initial forces, won't show up lightly, nor will they be any kinder or gentler to the natives... the best quip was:

"Well, we see you folks have eradicated the 1st brigade. We'd like to introduce you to wholesale carpet bombing and deforestation, and our five divisions of elite light infantry."​

Avatar may be the story of the victory of the natives over the earthlings, but Avatar II won't have such a happy ending for the natives...

 

[Dr Zaius]

Well, we see you folks have eradicated the 1st brigade. We'd like to introduce you to wholesale carpet bombing and deforestation, and our five divisions of elite light infantry.

More like planetary bombardment from space.

 

[Scott Tortorice]

Avatar in a minute:

[video=youtube;O9bsHAXwaEE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9bsHAXwaEE&feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

[Dr Zaius]

Yes, it smells like a rip off a little bit, even though I enjoyed it for the most part. Unfortunately, after this Cameron will be in a position to buy small countries and bask in the glow at the Academy Awards show.

If Cameron and Lucas ever collaborate on a movie -- which could actually happen -- the world may just melt.

 

[Honus]

I liked it, and I liked The Hangover as well.

 

[Dr Zaius]

I thought Pandora was cool and all, but it didn't make me want to kill myself after I left the theater.

 

[Double Deuce]

Haven't seen it and likely will not. Looks like a remake of Dances with Wolves using the cast of The Smurfs.

 

[kawaiku]

Hehe... that movie was Fern Gully with guns. I liked the world, the creatures, and the cliched "bad guy" ex-Marine colonel but... other than that... it sucked... for the graphics that movie had... it was the epitome of pathetic.

 

[Jockster]

I went and saw it at the local IMAX in 3D. It was quite a visual spectacle. Unfortunately, the writing, directing and storyline sucked. No real charector developement. You really never cared about any of the charectors. Bottom line; the movie is cool to watch as far as the visuals, but I was extemely disappointed in the rest. The movie was concepted 20 years ago and never evolved into anything but a rehash of a bunch of movies made at that time.