AVATAR Thread: POCAHONTAS in Space!

[mkaroly]

Hahaha, the Golden Globes actually gave AVATAR best picture. But I am not shocked -- the foreign press loved the film's messages, regardless of its inane story line.

I hope the Academy wakes up. AVATAR would the worst movie to ever win Best Picture if it does. I could think of dozens of more deserving films from last year -- including TERMINATOR SALVATION!

Lol....Oscars are right around the corner!!!

[Eric W.]

Like I said: Avatar is going to rake in every award known to mankind and if you think that's happening only because of the technical accomplishments of the film and has nothing to do with the heavy handed sermonizing and propoganda in this film, you're only kidding yourself.

This thing's untouchable.

[Coriolanus Quince]

Hi, I'm new here - glad to find people who are likewise unimpressed with this movie. I'm can't get over the hype which critics have been showering over Avatar. To be honest I didn't find the CGI work to be any more impressive than A Bug's Life!

[Eric W.]

Hi, I'm new here - glad to find people who are likewise unimpressed with this movie. I'm can't get over the hype which critics have been showering over Avatar. To be honest I didn't find the CGI work to be any more impressive than A Bug's Life!

Welcome to the forum.


The technical aspects of this film are pretty impressive. I certainly can appreciate the kind of work into all that and that's all great and I have no problems dumping all kind of hardware for technical achievments on this thing...but that's where it all ends for me.

Frankly, I liked the way Star Trek did their special effects and it's always by preference: Go real whenever you can.


You make a good point, though. They've only gone "so far" with CGI. It still looks fake at times and cartoonish and lifeless at times. "Too slick"

And yes, there were some instances where I was thinking about Bug's Life and other Pixar efforts that do this sort of thing better instead of having real life actors emoting to empty air and green and blue screens.

[AndyDursin]

Like I said: Avatar is going to rake in every award known to mankind and if you think that's happening only because of the technical accomplishments of the film and has nothing to do with the heavy handed sermonizing and propoganda in this film, you're only kidding yourself.

This thing's untouchable.

I will be very surprised if it wins Best Picture. The Oscars have no track record of honoring special effects movies, which is what this one is, particularly where Best Picture is concerned. And it didn't win any other awards -- nothing from film critics, nothing from Top 10 end of year lists. I saw DISTRICT 9 get more placement on Best Of lists than AVATAR.

I disliked it even more the second time I went -- and I did go a second time, just so I could confirm to myself that I hadn't "missed the boat."

That said I think the movie DID win because of its propaganda, especially because it's the FOREIGN press.

And of course, THE HANGOVER won Best Comedy. I mean, come on, THE HANGOVER? Funny movie the first time, but it wasn't even close to being the best movie in its class!

The Oscars themselves are gonna be a joke this year. 10 NOMINATED films for Best Picture. I guarantee you AVATAR and THE HANGOVER will be two of them.

Talk about watering down your pool of excellence. If they actually vote AVATAR the best film, the credibility, what's little there is, of the Academy will be gone forever.

(I will still watch it as I hope both Jeff Bridges and Sandra Bullock win the Acting awards -- which I expect both of them to).

[Eric W.]

I will be very surprised if it wins Best Picture. The Oscars have no track record of honoring special effects movies, which is what this one is, particularly where Best Picture is concerned. And it didn't win any other awards -- nothing from film critics, nothing from Top 10 end of year lists. I saw DISTRICT 9 get more placement on Best Of lists than AVATAR.

Normally I'd agree with you on this but there's a very important difference that changes everything and you mention it.*

I disliked it even more the second time I went -- and I did go a second time, just so I could confirm to myself that I hadn't "missed the boat."

Nope, you didn't miss any boat.

That's exactly the way I felt when The Phantom Menace came out. I HAD to go back and see it a second time because I simply couldn't believe it was that bad.

It was, and is.

That said I think the movie DID win because of its propaganda, especially because it's the FOREIGN press.

And this is exactlly what I think will put it over the top with the Academy. No question in my mind about it.

I'll be stunned if this thing doesn't clean house in every area its nominated in, including Best Picture.

This is the difference maker.

And of course, THE HANGOVER won Best Comedy. I mean, come on, THE HANGOVER? Funny movie the first time, but it wasn't even close to being the best movie in its class!

The Oscars themselves are gonna be a joke this year.

When are they not?

10 NOMINATED films for Best Picture. I guarantee you AVATAR and THE HANGOVER will be two of them.

No question about it. And Avatar will win. If the propoganda and political element weren't in this thing, I'd agree with you that it wouldn't win Best Picture for the reasons you cited.

Talk about watering down your pool of excellence.

Very true although I must say: The output from Hollywood being what it is...how much "excellence" is there, really?

If they actually vote AVATAR the best film, the credibility, what's little there is, of the Academy will be gone forever.

I was about to say...for me the Academy lost credibility a LONG time ago.

(I will still watch it as I hope both Jeff Bridges and Sandra Bullock win the Acting awards -- which I expect both of them to).

^^ They deserve it but you couldn't pay me to waste my evening watching that garbage. 3+ hours of a complete and utterly pointless waste of time.

[AndyDursin]

And this is exactlly what I think will put it over the top with the Academy. No question in my mind about it.

I'll be stunned if this thing doesn't clean house in every area its nominated in, including Best Picture.

This is the difference maker.

I still don't believe it's going to happen. Not one major critic called it the Best Movie of last year that I saw. That plays a part in it.

I agree the messages are there, and the agenda is as clear as day, but it's something that would resonate more with the foreign press than anyone. Did any of them see THE HURT LOCKER or UP IN THE AIR? The Academy voting block is going to be more in tune with those films -- after all this is the same Academy that shunned every sci-fi/fantasy film ever made until RETURN OF THE KING. From ANNIE HALL beating STAR WARS to -- one of the worst examples of all -- GHANDI beating E.T., they usually run from big fantasy movies.

Especially ones financed by Fox.

Very true although I must say: The output from Hollywood being what it is...how much "excellence" is there, really?

Certainly not enough to sustain 10 nominated films, which is my point. They have a hard time finding 5 quality movies.

Extending it to 10 is ridiculous.

I was about to say...for me the Academy lost credibility a LONG time ago.

I can see that. For me, while I don't always agree with their Best Picture choices, they are usually films of a certain type and are, usually, widely acclaimed by critics. AVATAR would buck a historical trend that's been long standing. It would be one of the more poorly-received films to ever win Best Picture. Most of its reviews were good, but very few of them were outstanding, and as I said, very few critics called it the best film of the year...if there was any one that did.

It would be odd for this movie to win Best Picture having won so few awards and notices.

A more likely scenario would be Cameron winning Best Director (basically honoring his technical achievements) but a film like UP IN THE AIR winning Best Picture. They won't want to give the Directing award out to a kid like Jason Reitman, so they'll split the difference and Cameron will win -- but the film won't. That's happened a few times in the recent past, and I could see that happening this year.

[Paul MacLean]

Avatar has now claimed its first victim it seems...

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/mo ... 5821333043


Man died after watching Avatar - doctor

Man starts to feel unwell during movie
Dies 11 days later
"First death linked to Avatar"

A 42-year-old Taiwanese man with a history of high blood pressure has died of a stroke likely triggered by over-excitement from watching the blockbuster Avatar in 3D, a doctor says.

The man, identified only by his surname Kuo, started to feel unwell during the screening earlier this month in the northern city of Hsinchu and was taken to hospital.

Mr Kuo, who suffered from hypertension, was unconscious when he arrived at the Nan Men General Hospital and a scan showed that his brain was haemorrhaging, emergency room doctor Peng Chin-chih said today.

"It's likely that the over-excitement from watching the movie triggered his symptoms,'' the doctor said.

Mr Kuo died 11 days later from the brain haemorrhage, and the China Times newspaper said it was the first death linked to watching James Cameron's science-fiction epic Avatar.

Film blogging sites have reported complaints of headaches, dizziness, nausea and blurry eyesight from viewers of Avatar and other movies rich in 3D imagery.


I can personally attest to having experienced these symptoms myself. The 3D definitely caused me headaches and blurry eyesight (though it was the story and characters that induced the nausea).

[Eric W.]

I can personally attest to having experienced these symptoms myself. The 3D definitely caused me headaches and blurry eyesight (though it was the story and characters that induced the nausea).

You are far from alone in having problems like these, which is why I just couldn't be less fired up or in a hurry to throw my wallet open for any of this.

The man dying...that's pretty extreme and probably a fluke but I think people would be unwise to outright ignore that situation and dismiss it.

[Eric Paddon]

Cameron reveals himself to be a very sick human being.

James Cameron, the director of mega-blockbuster Avatar, isn't worried that some people may not like the film's political message.

In a print-only interview in the current Entertainment Weekly, reporter Benjamin Svetkey tells Cameron that somebody has called Avatar the "perfect ecoterrorism recruiting tool." Here's Cameron's response in its entirety:

"Good, good, I like that one. I consider that a positive review. I believe in ecoterrorism."

Maybe Cameron doesn't know what ecoterrorism is?

If he does, then the world's biggest director just endorsed a form of left-wing political violence. And no one bats an eye.

[Eric W.]

Cameron reveals himself to be a very sick human being.

James Cameron, the director of mega-blockbuster Avatar, isn't worried that some people may not like the film's political message.

In a print-only interview in the current Entertainment Weekly, reporter Benjamin Svetkey tells Cameron that somebody has called Avatar the "perfect ecoterrorism recruiting tool." Here's Cameron's response in its entirety:

"Good, good, I like that one. I consider that a positive review. I believe in ecoterrorism."

Maybe Cameron doesn't know what ecoterrorism is?

If he does, then the world's biggest director just endorsed a form of left-wing political violence. And no one bats an eye.

I already way overblew my currency today. No comment. It speaks for itself like many other things.

[Paul MacLean]

Maybe Cameron doesn't know what ecoterrorism is?

He's a technical wizard and brilliant showman, his films are the equivalent of theme park rides. But I don't think he's much of an intellectual. I could never imagine him making a literary adaptation for instance.

And he's obviously unaware that ecoterrorists tend to target wealthy people who build big houses in ecologically fragile areas and drive SUVs -- like James Cameron.

[Eric W.]

Cameron reveals himself to be a very sick human being.

James Cameron, the director of mega-blockbuster Avatar, isn't worried that some people may not like the film's political message.

In a print-only interview in the current Entertainment Weekly, reporter Benjamin Svetkey tells Cameron that somebody has called Avatar the "perfect ecoterrorism recruiting tool." Here's Cameron's response in its entirety:

"Good, good, I like that one. I consider that a positive review. I believe in ecoterrorism."

Maybe Cameron doesn't know what ecoterrorism is?

If he does, then the world's biggest director just endorsed a form of left-wing political violence. And no one bats an eye.

Just for note of reference: JC made no disclaimers of any kind, no qualifiers, no sidebars, no nuthin'.

There were no follow up questions, and nothing was taken out of context.

It's right on page 35 of the latest print issue of EW and before long it should show up on their website...or will it?

[AndyDursin]

I need to check out the new EW...

[Paul MacLean]

Here's Variety's Peter Bart on Avatar's overal reception by critics and audiences...

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111801 ... yid=1&cs=1

'Avatar' plot thickens

Critics in awe but film raises hackles on right, left

In its first two weeks or so of release, "Avatar" has definitely become part of the national conversation.
That portends big box office and also a lot of noise.

Here's the way "Avatar" is resonating on talk radio and in the blogosphere:

To the hard right, Cameron is exposing naive sci-fi film buffs to onerous lefty propaganda about the environment and climate change and portraying American soldiers in a dark light.

To women, Cameron, the reputed misogynist, has delivered a pro-feminist tract in which women are characterized as the spiritual tutors, or, as a Vanity Fair blog put it, "Pandora, even God, is a she and her name is Eywa."

To the left, Cameron is now instantly a liberal folk hero for effectively allocating half a billion dollars of Rupert Murdoch's resources to create a film that would be ideologically repellent to the media mogul.

There's wide confusion among the noisemakers about the basic facts of the movie itself. To those on the right side of the political spectrum, the combatants assaulting the natives of Pandora are U.S. Marines, who are depicted as being unnecessarily brutal. To those on the left, they are independent contractors who are correctly portrayed as being mindless mercenaries.

Instead of discussing mindless mercenaries, however, the mindless reviewers by and large are focusing on the film's special effects and the impact of performance capture and 3D. The reviews mostly have been exemplary on those levels -- indeed, in some cases downright orgasmic.

To some reviewers, movies will never be the same and, indeed, on some levels, they are right: James Cameron has raised the stakes both visually and financially. The care and feeding of tentpoles will now be even pricier and more precarious as rival filmmakers try to match Cameron and raise him one.

There were dissenters in the critical community, to be sure. Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly gave the film a "B." But what can you expect from a critic who considers "Far From Heaven" the best movie of the decade?

The Wall Street Journal's normally astute Joe Morgenstern liked "Avatar" but, as though defensively, also called it "a lumbering parable of colonial aggression." Was he seeing an old John Huston movie by mistake?

As for my opinion, "Avatar" would surely decorate my year's top 10 list … except that I'm not a listmaker. In fact, I think top 10 lists are useless when it comes to film.

Movies are there to be enjoyed on several different levels -- as aesthetic achievements or as guilty pleasures. When critics formulate their top 10 lists, they almost always want to make themselves look smart by giving weight to intellectual content. Hence Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune rated "There Will Be Blood" as the best film of the decade when that film is about as moving as a root canal. Honoring "Blood" makes Phillips look very intelligent, however.

A.O. (Tony) Scott of The New York Times hands his best-of-the-decade honor to "Wall-E," when another Pixar film, "Up," was vastly more compelling, though it lacked the environmental message.

The trouble with listmaking is that you subconsciously want to make yourself look good. When I'm asked about my favorite magazine, I prefer to list Cahiers du Cinema rather than People. I got more dopey fun this year out of "Pirate Radio" than, say, "Invictus," but the latter would inevitably make my 10-best list.

There's another issue: How much weight do you give to "social importance?" Perversely, "Deep Throat" was probably a more important movie than "Godfather" the same year, but I wouldn't want to put that one on a list.

That's why I don't do lists, I suppose. They're downright embarrassing.