Avatar's Inspiration

I gave up my selfish desire to see the newest special effects, weighted against my ill regard of James Cameron. But if you two keep knocking on Pocahontas, I may change my mind. With Stella's permission, of course.
 
I gave up my selfish desire to see the newest special effects, weighted against my ill regard of James Cameron. But if you two keep knocking on Pocahontas, I may change my mind. With Stella's permission, of course.
Hey, I'm not knocking Pocahontas. I like that movie just fine. That doesn't make it right for James to have stolen it for his film. ;) And I think you should give into your selfish desire and see the special effects. They're worth a look...maybe not 3 hours worth, but worth it.

The songs aren't nearly as good though.
 
Last edited:
I can dig blue titties just fine-- not to mention squid tentacles and prehensile tails. Just... Well.
 
I can dig blue titties just fine-- not to mention squid tentacles and prehensile tails. Just... Well.
Pocahontas has squid tentacles and a tail? :confused:

Oh, wait, you mean the other one. Well, okay, she's got the tentacles and tail, but Pocahontas has more on top.
 
Pocahontas has squid tentacles and a tail? :confused:

Oh, wait, you mean the other one. Well, okay, she's got the tentacles and tail, but Pocahontas has more on top.

I love a good storytailing :)
 
I'll bet the blue blue meanie can run fast.
Notice how long those legs are?
 
I can dig blue titties just fine-- not to mention squid tentacles and prehensile tails. Just... Well.

Well what? Is the body art not to your taste? I'm sure the tail functionality is for balance, Stella.
And out of curiosity, were there any deep tissue massages in the film?
 
Well what? Is the body art not to your taste? I'm sure the tail functionality is for balance, Stella.
And out of curiosity, were there any deep tissue massages in the film?
Once you put on those 3-D glasses, baby, you get it all! $300 million buys you the best that modern film technology can offer, it'll stroke you, it'll feel you up...there won't be a dry seat in the theater....

But the blueys still don't have very good songs to sing. It's the tails....
 
Well what? Is the body art not to your taste? I'm sure the tail functionality is for balance, Stella.
And out of curiosity, were there any deep tissue massages in the film?
Oh, man, no-- tattoos get me going! And blue skin, as well. :cattail:

I have problems with the quality of the plot-- so much so that the eyecandy isn't as sweet to me as it should be. The more money spent on a film, the stupider it will be, sadly.
 
Hey, it's not like Pocahontas was an original story...this same tale is found in every culture and goes back thousands of years.
 
Hey, it's not like Pocahontas was an original story...this same tale is found in every culture and goes back thousands of years.
Um...you're missing the joke. Yes, we all know this (you really don't have to remind us of the fact that this tale is an old one found in every culture; we're all writers here and we kinda know that). But an old story can be re-written in a way that makes it cool, or in a way that makes it awful by making sure you see how old and tired it is. And a storyteller makes this "awful" worse if they decide to copy a version of that old tale that made it old and tired.

The joke is what version of this old story was used as a template and how close a copy it is to that version. Not that an old story was used.
 
3D doesn't work real well when you've only got one good eye. :rolleyes:
 
There were bits and pieces of nods to Aliens in it, too. There's probably lots of Easter eggs in the background that nobody will notice until they really scrutinize the film over time. It works overall, even if all the Putomayo background music for the N'avi culture is kinda ehhhh...
 
Most people agree the story is substandard crap—I certainly do—but I'm curious if anyone thinks the ever so praised visuals aren't that magnificent either.

The technical proficiency with which the visuals were brought to life is stunning, but what about the imagery itself?

Maybe I expect too much, but when I say "stunning visuals", I mean something iconic, something that etches itself in the viewer's mind, something that's notable for its aesthetics. Out of any number of movies that could serve as an illustration, a few that come to mind could be the first part of Aliens, or Brazil, or 2001, or Blade Runner, or yes, Matrix.

As the examples show, some of these movies are 'artsy', but not all. That's not the condition, and I'm leaving the story out of it for this purpose. What all these movies have in common, though, is what I'd call stunning visuals, and the ones in Avatar don't qualify in my mind.

Avatar is … pretty, in a safe and a bit kitschy way. Nothing in it is designed to reach the viewer so much as it is to appeal to the viewer, like a product appeals to a consumer. It looks as though every single image is a product of meticulous research that showed that 75% of people like this or that and go ahhh when they see one thing and ohhh when they see another.

Had the movie moved me on the visual level, had it been a series of brilliant visions hanged on a thin plot, I would have been ready to forgive the plot, but the truth is, I found it equally corny and formulaic on both levels.

Probably I'm judging it by the standards that don't apply anyhow, but I wonder what everyone else thinks from this angle.
 
Back
Top