James Cameron's AVATAR discussion thread

[bagelsncheesey]

WOW!! Congratz!! I didn't know u can buy them for urself!!
Mind if I ask how much they are and where I can find them??

Well we have a home theater store locally that sells them, but you can check them out at D-Box's website. They have a home theater section.

https://www.d-box.com

 

[devilof76]

Awww Devil! Don't be a h8r! We all know ur a closet tree hugger!

I like trees. And woods in general. I do live in Maine. I just don't need to make friends with them to keep myself from becoming mortally depressed.

Unfortunately that doesn't mean ????. Hollywood is a business and they are in it to make money. The movies that make money will get sequels. Box office is the only way really to determine succuess because it shows that a lo of people went to see it and more importantly they went multiple times because they like it.

Ok. It doesn't mean ???? to Hollywood. It does mean ???? in terms of the bigger picture, and I'll be damned if what Hollywood chooses to support financially is the be-all end-all of esthetic value.

Besides, I acknowledged that it was a financial success. What else is it worth? Profound audio/visual spectacle? Is that all? Not that that is a small feat, but as greatly as it may have been executed, that is still just an achievement of technique. What I'm questioning is the quality of substance. I'm sincerely curious.

 

[blakus939]

Just had to quote this image again.

Haha EXACTLY what i'm thinking too, such a ripoff. Bring this to the small screen, even in digital HD, and there is absolutely nothing going for it. By all means, kudos for the fantastic effects, but the movie is so otherwise bland, i really dont understand all the hoohaa

 

[Something Sexy]

I like trees. And woods in general. I do live in Maine. I just don't need to make friends with them to keep myself from becoming mortally depressed.



Ok. It doesn't mean ???? to Hollywood. It does mean ???? in terms of the bigger picture, and I'll be damned if what Hollywood chooses to support financially is the be-all end-all of esthetic value.

Besides, I acknowledged that it was a financial success. What else is it worth? Profound audio/visual spectacle? Is that all? Not that that is a small feat, but as greatly as it may have been executed, that is still just an achievement of technique. What I'm questioning is the quality of substance. I'm sincerely curious.

I agree, I have found as I grew up (of course when you are a kid you like everything) that what I like and what Hollywood usually chooses to make aren't the same but unfortunately Hollywood mostly chooses what is going to sell that is why I try to go more towards independent films but sometimes those are hard to see unless you live in a major city. It sucks for the consumer that what is actually a piece of art or a great film doesn't mean ???? because if executives don't think it will make money then it won't get made.

 

[agen_kolar]

I really hate this crap. It is the #1 reason that I have zero desire to see the film.

Wait, what?

 

[Kuzeh]

Well we have a home theater store locally that sells them, but you can check them out at D-Box's website. They have a home theater section.

https://www.d-box.com

Nice!! I just found out that one of my local theaters just got D-Boxes and they're showing Sherlock Holmes, gotta check it out!!! !!

Ok. It doesn't mean ???? to Hollywood. It does mean ???? in terms of the bigger picture, and I'll be damned if what Hollywood chooses to support financially is the be-all end-all of esthetic value.

But that's what Hollywood is all about?...

Besides, I acknowledged that it was a financial success. What else is it worth? Profound audio/visual spectacle? Is that all? Not that that is a small feat, but as greatly as it may have been executed, that is still just an achievement of technique. What I'm questioning is the quality of substance. I'm sincerely curious.

There was plenty of substance in the movie... rehashed maybe, and a bit cliché...
but if you didn't see all the naturalist/environmentalist/world-equilibrium references, then maybe you were just too busy being awed by the visuals?...

 

[lightwave000]

Haha EXACTLY what i'm thinking too, such a ripoff. Bring this to the small screen, even in digital HD, and there is absolutely nothing going for it. By all means, kudos for the fantastic effects, but the movie is so otherwise bland, i really dont understand all the hoohaa

I didn't understand the hoopla for TDK. Other than Heath Ledger I thought it was rather boring. The music was good, but Christian Bale's gruff deep disguised voice ruined it big time for me. I felt really embarrassed to be watching it in those scenes. lol

I know there is a big following for TDK so don't come after me on that-Just my opinion.

I do think AVATAR could have been done better. I think appealing to ages 8-80 kept it from being dark and gruff and more Terminator-esque but would limit its audience and take at the box office. Looking at the concept art-they cut out MAJORLY cool things-some of which would have been better to put on screen than some of what ended up there. But the box office reigns and thats the way it is.

 

[lightwave000]

Just an everyday stroll through the Pandorian jungle-

 

[Bamboota]

Just an everyday stroll through the Pandorian jungle-

HAH!!! nice!! Where u get the hi res pic?

 

[LChinoz]

Besides, I acknowledged that it was a financial success. What else is it worth? Profound audio/visual spectacle? Is that all? Not that that is a small feat, but as greatly as it may have been executed, that is still just an achievement of technique. What I'm questioning is the quality of substance. I'm sincerely curious.

It is a good movie with a lot of substance. Critics like it, audiences like it, and trust me, it's not all about the spectacle. Watch it and you might be surprised.

I didn't understand the hoopla for TDK. Other than Heath Ledger I thought it was rather boring. The music was good, but Christian Bale's gruff deep disguised voice ruined it big time for me. I felt really embarrassed to be watching it in those scenes. lol

I know there is a big following for TDK so don't come after me on that-Just my opinion.

I do think AVATAR could have been done better. I think appealing to ages 8-80 kept it from being dark and gruff and more Terminator-esque but would limit its audience and take at the box office. Looking at the concept art-they cut out MAJORLY cool things-some of which would have been better to put on screen than some of what ended up there. But the box office reigns and thats the way it is.

TDK rocks. And...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/05/avatar-sex-scene-deleted_n_411642.html

"James Cameron's latest blockbuster 'Avatar' has already grossed over $1 billion worldwide, and that's without the benefit of any steamy sex scenes. However, that doesn't mean that one wasn't shot.

Actress Zoe Saldana, who played the female lead, the Na'vi alien Neytiri, told a group of reporters that they did indeed shoot a sex scene between her and male lead Sam Worthington, but it was not included in the final product because Cameron felt it would push them past a PG-13 rating.

Zaldana described how the Na'vi do the deed:

'If you sync to your banshee and you're syncing to a tree, why not sync into a person? I almost feel like you'll have the most amazing orgasm, I guess. It was a very funny scene to shoot because there were so many technical things that sometimes you have to keep in mind that paying attention to all those might disrupt the fluidity of how a scene is supposed to take place.'

She said the scene will be included in the special edition DVD."


Apparently it was made for more mature audiences...but they wanted a damn PG-13 rating. Good or bad, this deleted scene would have been a riot to see (and see it we will on Blu-ray). Nerds rejoice

 

[galactiboy]

I actually was a bit surprised they didn't plug-in like they do with every other damn thing on that planet

 

[Bamboota]

'If you sync to your banshee and you're syncing to a tree, why not sync into a person? I almost feel like you'll have the most amazing orgasm, I guess. It was a very funny scene to shoot because there were so many technical things that sometimes you have to keep in mind that paying attention to all those might disrupt the fluidity of how a scene is supposed to take place.'

MMMmmmm hot tentacle porn!!

 

[cr`]

I still think that anyone actually sitting through this movie and having time to analyze the story, or wonder about it's plotpoints when their brains should be on visual sensory overload and a gleeful childlike smile from ear to ear , are just not getting it.

Those people can stick to the other good movies this year that challenge the mind, or have complex plot points or whatever.

or maybe for some people sensory overload alone is not enough, especially since the visuals themselves are taken from other films. if you've seen miyazaki films on the big screen, especially nausicaa and laputa, that flying scenes and floating mountain and giant trees wont impress you as much.

dont get me wrong, i like this film. i just wish i could LOVE this film. and who's that who said TDK was boring?

 

[cr`]

MMMmmmm hot tentacle porn!!

and i thought there was a couple of tentacle rapes already in the film, with the horse and the banshee.

 

[chewblacca]

Take away all of the pretty visuals and all the eye candy and just look at the story, how many of you think it would of done as well as it has? Like imagine this was in the old west, sorry, Kevin Kostner has already done that.

 

[ironwez20]

So what the visuals are thier the concept is thier its doing good at the box office it has tons of fans. Seriously people need to stop finding somthing wrong with every single thing. What is this the 1960s every movie has eyecandy,thats how twilight is so popular.

 

[ironwez20]

MMMmmmm hot tentacle porn!!

 

[Sithlord1975]

Take away all of the pretty visuals and all the eye candy and just look at the story, how many of you think it would of done as well as it has? Like imagine this was in the old west, sorry, Kevin Kostner has already done that.

No it wouldn't have done well. The SELL of this movie was the amazing visuals and virtual actors and 3D.
I still don't get why people don't understand this! lmao

 

[cr`]

and i still dont get why people dont understand that it's POSSIBLE to have a great visual AND a great story.

and cameron did a couple of those if i recall.

and i have to add: i'm not necessarily asking for a complex story here. simple can also be great. miyazaki films all have simple stories, ditto with some other films of directors i respect. but simple does not equal predictable/generic. the two things are not the same.

 

[lightwave000]

HAH!!! nice!! Where u get the hi res pic?

Thanks, I usually put more effort into my photomanipulations but not bad for 5 mins if I do say so myself ;-)

I ran a google search for avatar amp image and found the high res