Avatar: James Cameron's Ostensibly Revolutionary Spacey 3D Cinematic D&D Campaign


I didn't mind Avatar for what it was, but I have no desire to see this again.

PS - A big "Hah!" to everyone that will rebuy the DVD/Bluray version when they add the new stuff.


You've gotta give Lucas credit for at least trying to be creative. I knew what was going to happen in Avatar from the moment Steve Lang told Sam Worthington to gain the trust of the blue people. In the prequels, I figured the good guys would win in the first two movies and not the last, but much of the rest was unexpected.

Granted, that was probably because a good portion of it didn't make sense*, but now we're splitting hairs.

*i.e. Anakin actually insisting he should be all-powerful, genuinely believing he could stop other people from dying, etc.


To be clear, the only reason I think Scrax should see Avatar in 3D is because that's really the only reason to see the movie.

Honestly, some things are worth experiencing for that reason alone. You don't ride a roller coaster ride expecting to have your preconceived notions challenged. "Welcome to the Georg Hegel ride at Six Flags' Magic Mountain! Please keep your arms and legs inside the vehicle at all times, as questioning your felt inclinations in this matter may lead to you reaching your finitude."

This isn't one of those movies where the 3D was an afterthought after-processing designed to capitalize on a fad (Last Airbender, Clash of the Titans) or something that was possible due to the inherent nature of the original source (any computer-animated film), but rather the whole point of the movie in the first place. The plot was grabbed off-the-shelf on purpose -- a tried-and-true story that could help work as a vehicle for demonstrating a superior 3D cinema experience. The 3D experience is the only reason to watch.


Aside from the computer UI stuff, the use of 3D is absolutely terrible in Avatar and doesn't hold a candle to How to Train Your Dragon or Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.


Sorry. You're wrong. The 3d in Avatar was pretty damn amazing, as were the visuals in general. It enthralled everyone I've spoken to about it, as well as the entire (large) Imax movie theater where I saw the flick. That's the very definition of "successful use of a visual medium".

You can validly criticize many aspects of Avatar. Hell, you can even say the visuals didn't work for you. But to say that the visuals were "terrible" is just fucking stupid.


That's not what I said. I said "the use of 3D was terrible." Two entirely different things. Pixar's use of 3D is nothing great, but that doesn't mean their visuals are terrible.


The moment that really got me in Avatar was when avatar guy and alien chick were walking around outside and these little glowy bits started to fall all around them. That was a pretty awesome use of 3D.


The moment that really got me was when the embers started flying around during the battle. I wanted to reach out and brush them away, but they weren't really there.


What was ignorant about that? I'm not saying the political machination in the prequels were all that compelling to watch, but Avatar's narrative is built on false premises.


Comparing Avatar to How to Train Your Dragon is simply unfair. HtTYD is amazing.


I actually think it's far worse than the prequels. At least the prequels had a few entertaining action scenes and some fun Jedi stuff. Avatar was like chewing glass while Keith Olbermann yelled in your ear.


I still don't see how the qualitative difference makes it unfair. How to Train Your Dragon's had dragon riding sequences run laps around Avatar's and actually used 3D to create a thrilling sensation.


I already knew there would be three different releases on disc – plain Jane, extended cut (later this year) and the 3D version (next year).


It's an unfair comparison because they're going for different "looks", if you will. It's like comparing, I dunno, Van Gogh to Da Vinci or Michaelangelo? The vector is pointing in a different direction, and both of their magnitudes are very high?

Hell, it's 4 in the morning, I should go to sleep instead of trying to explain my thought process. grins


The prequels were like talking about the couseness of sand while Bush was president.


Like I said, at least the prequels had a few good action scenes and some cool Jedi stuff -- I much prefer movies with a few good scenes even if the remainder is terrible (like the Prequels) over movies that are just relentlessly bland and (even worse) preachy, like Avatar. The latter is just tiresome and instantly forgettable, while at least with the first type of films I remember the cool stuff (and probably laugh at the bad stuff).


HTTYD is the only 3D movie I've lamented seeing in 2D. (Which is to say our local theatre didn't have 3D yet and this was the only movie that made me regret that.)


I saw Avatar last night (2D) and the one thing that stood out for me was the facial motion capture. That was pretty damned revolutionary. The story not so much, bog-standard SF fare all around.



Avatar didn't shoot my nostalgia dog.


I try and keep my feelings about the inconsistencies between the prequels and Star Wars compartmentalized from the stuff that is just plain bad even if they existed in a vacuum. Anakin building C3PO on Tattoine, while relentlessly stupid from a continuity point of view, is only middling stupid on its own. It's part of the "ridiculous child genius" thing, which has been done before and is not in itself awful, though it doesn't help that Jake Lloyd was a post who couldn't sell being upset or angry, let alone being a "genius."