I mean, did I clear that up with what I was getting at. Which was why I stated what it meant after both statements. Scuse me, I am off to put my fingers back in my ears...lalalalalalalala!
Ok, you can cite Citizen Kane and act like this is a movie you watch every day, like any film student, and I can cite a bunch of movies that I watched in film school as well, like the Dubliners, Hidden Fortress, Dreams, or Gone With My Fart, but let's cut to the grind and get to the sci fi ones. You know, the ones that not every film student claims to LOVE because it makes them look good. The ones that have serious opposing opinions because some people hate them and others love them, and each side can freely ridicule them, because unlike "The classics" no professor called them "The Perfect movie." What I'm saying is how can you overlook Star Trek 2's flaws and exaggerated acting and enjoy it anyway, but the people who do so for Avatar (not because of the 3D, not because of the Digital Effects, but because we actually think the characters are interesting enough to follow) are in any way different? I'm not saying, "How can you like Star Trek, and not like Avatar?" I'm saying why are you trying to convince us about how flawed the movie we enjoy is, when I'm pretty sure I can give you multiple examples of how flawed some of the movies you listed are, and it wouldn't convince you otherwise? (And that's because I actually enjoy and love some of the ones you mentioned) The subject is Avatar 2, and we're talking about how bad Avatar 1 is, when outside if derailing, is kinda pointless because if you look in the Iron Man 2 Thread, you'll notice that I don't have a single post there (that I know of) because I didn't think the first movie was that great, so it does me no good to barge into IM2's thread to talk about how I did not enjoy the first movie. I'm not sayin' "Stay out of our thread", because healthy discussion is still fun," But why try to tell us that the ice cream was horrible, after we've already decided that it was delicious, and just want to talk about seconds? This of course after acknowledging that the icecream you prefer is not perfect, but you like it anyway. Go watch the Seven Samurai, then go Watch Magnificent Seven. And I could seriously name SO MANY more of these. Can you tell me that this is the first time a movie's story has been remade? Now can you also tell me that the remakes, or "reimaginings have all been horrible, simply because they were reimaginings?" I was just making a point, Z. I downloaded the first episode of Avatar on PSN and we actually enjoyed it. I still think it borrows a lot of elements from anime, especially in the facial expressions, but it was nice to see that he (Avatar) didn't take the Gee-Wiz too far. I am actually REALLY looking forward to the movie, but I don't know enough about the series to comment on it, which is why I don't visit the thread. But if I didn't like the series, I especially would not visit the thread to piss on everyone else's good time. lol Understand the progression of events, buddy. Someone starts a thread about Avatar 2, pressumably excited over its potential existence. One would think that other fans of the movie would chime in about how excited they are... Instead, we get the folks who still hate the first movie come in and try to convince us why it's so bad.... Now, Tell me, Mr. Nightmare, what did you do the last time someone put down something that you enjoyed? Did you just agree to disagree, or did you try to make a counterpoint to their argument? I think you have to consider that if people simply talk about the topic, we'll be fine, but if you come in here to attack it, people tend to defend their point. Romeo and Juliette has been reminagined plenty of times, and it's also been remade with a different name and location, West Side Story. It's a highly-acclaimed movie, and guess what...it's a remake.
I never said that. I said that I didn't like the core story to begin with. If I didn't like the story in the original why would I like it the second time when it's exactly the same? Seventh Samurai I watched and I loved. And I loved Magnificent Seven even if it was a reimagining of the former film and I DO acknowledge that it's basicly Seven Samurai but with cawboys. Which is what most Avatar fans fail to do. Reimaginings are usualy a good idea to keep thing oldschool, simple and familiar but add a new twist to it. It's just that I didn't like the source material that was going thought the processs of reimagining. I hope I made this kinda clear... I had a disagreement on the other cartoon forum the other day. I was comparing One Piece to Fairy Tail and how similar they are yet still Fairy Tail fails to be fun and how I feel the characters are uninteresting. The other guy however claimed that One Piece is boring and that Fairty Tail is much better. He said his reason why he thinks that, I said my reason why I think differently and we understood that we just have different tastes when it come to some details. There! We had a totaly logical and clean discusion with actually good arguments. I don't usually like talking to Avatar fans because when ever you present them a logical argument of why I don't like a movie they seem to start screaming at me at how I don't know s*it and how Avatar is the greatest movie EVUR, that I just love boring-ass black and white old man movies, that James Cameron is god, W00T CGI W00T and stupid crap like that without pointing to single solid reason why they liked the film. That's why I usually get annoyed everytime Avatar is mention. I DO love some stupid simple fun movies. Like say Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy. I find them to be very interesting and fun to watch, but also I can see that their actual worth is crap and that there is actualy a lot of things that are just stupid and wrong. Yet I still love watching them. I love the chratacters, I like the overall idea and atmosphere od thee film and I find the premise to be quite interesting giving a new spin on the old pirate zanr. Avatar might be a superior film in terms of quality compared to these movies but for me it just wasn't fun to watch, I didn't feel any of the characters, I didn't like the premise and the way the story was presented, and I just didn't think the whole Pandora was as imagnitive as everybody claimed to be. I just didn't.
Fair enough. Because I absolutely love the story. I do find the acting nice and cheesy, which makes it a little fun to watch IMO. But again, the story and direction is what I think drives it. Honestly, I'm sure you would be able to sway me. I'm only adamant in a few movies, the rest of my opinions can usually be changed with the right argument. Good point, I'll keep the Avatar hatred to its respective thread. No, you should be telling me to stay out of the thread. I'll leave you guys alone, unless you want to keep discussing it in PMs, in which case I'll be glad to.
Honestlty, bro, as far as these threads are concerned, no one, but no one has defended Avatar on it being an original idea, and no one has stated that it doesn't parallel Dances with Wolves. Those who are defending it are simply stating that it is an enjoyable movie, despite it being a retold story. I don't think Avatar fans are failing at understanding that by a long shot. I think what a lot of Avatar haters fail at is realizing that their argument (Not yours) of "it's Dances with Smurfs" falls on deaf ears only because that statement alone would dismiss movies like West Side Story, The Proposal, and U571 as being crap simply based on the fact that they are retellings of other movies, and at least half of these movies are really not bad at all (West Side Story even being considered a classic by some). Some people simply don't like Avatar, Like Sage (and that's completely understandable), but some people's only argument (and I have heard this a hundred times more than people saying It's Not) is that it's a rip-off of Dances With Wolves. Again, yes it is, But Jake Sully is cooler than Keven Kostner. I ain't dissing your taste, because Star Trek 2, Up, and Kain are pho-king great movies.
My wife and I just watched Avatar for the first time last night. We both agreed that while entertaining, we felt Cameron & Co. hit us over the head with the messages. It certainly wasn't original (was Jake the Chosen One or was he supposed to bring balance to the Force?) nor was it the best movie we've ever seen but we had fun watching it and were interested to see how it ended. Seeing as how we don't rate movies for a living, it was good enough for us.
Honestly, having just watched Avatar for the first time, I don't get what's so horribly bad about it. I didn't really like it, and yeah the story and characters were kinda weak, but it wasn't bad. The only thing is, I'm not sure what a sequel could be about. Very pretty movie though, the effects were nice and the visible emotions coming off the aliens were very realistic and convincing. The villains were bull, though. I usually like villains, and I think villains should be interesting and funj to watch. But these guys were just ridiculous.
Avatar 2: With JakeSkully part of the crew, young Navi becomes interested in Human culture, lifestyle and technology. they break off into their own crew, and live off technology left behind by the humans. These Navi have nowhere to put their trash, so they start dumping toxic shit into the oceans. the Ocean Monsters get pissed, and kills these Navi, but they don't stop there, and they try and wipeout the whole Navi Race. Pandora, like earth, is covered more in water than land, so the Ocean Monsters outnumber the Navi. The Navi has nowhere to go for help, so Jake calls the Marines, and they come to save the day. The Navi and humans learn to co exist, and they live happily ever after.
Whoa whoa whoa- Earth's ocean life isn't diverse? You better stop right there, my friend. As for the current discussion- okay, so Avatar's plot was predictable to a "T". At times I thought I was watching a hardcore alien flick, but it's absolute adherence to cliche's ruined the story for me. Was it packed with visceral thrills? Yes. Were the characters cardboard cutouts? Yes. Was it a poorly written script and movie? YEAH. But was it a bad movie? No- it was innovative, and beautiful. Just really boring.
What ruined Avatar for me was that contrary to popular belief, it wasn't new technology that made the visuals 3D, it was the fact that the characterizations were 0D having donated 1D to the visuals. With the exception of Quaritch, the characters in Avatar were among the most boring ever to appear in cinema.
Quaritch was fun, but he was basically just the same generic hard-ass high-ranking military officer that we've seen in a hundred other films. He provided a good bit of adversity, but I thought his character was about as interesting and dynamic as a boot - which is probably how it was supposed to be since he was the embodiment of heartless, ignorant military might. I'm assuming that he'll be back in some form for the next movie, weather it's a clone or a cyborg, etc. I don't particularly need to see him again, but if he does come back it'll at least be fun to watch his butt get kicked again.
Folks are always saying that they want to do movies that they never get round to, thats just the way it goes in the film industry. Unless he is actually sitting on the option and stopping somebody else from doing it, theres no point in getting annoyed at the dude for being more interested in something else. Hell, i'd be interested in whatever pays the most if i'd been divorced 4 times.
You're right, "to EVER appear in Cinema." Billions in earnings (including DVD and Bluray sales, thus not 3D, prove that a hellovalot of people like boring shit. I should just repost Rabid's quote instead of responding, lol.
