*** Official AVATAR Discussion Thread - Page 19

I've only seen the iMax version and I definitely remember the command to take the Ikran and strike from above.  It must have been subtitled.

well I saw Avatar here in the UK

first in Real 3D (not IMAX)

and then some weeks later in good 'old 2D


did not notice much difference in the experience, although i would definitely say the 2D has better PQ specifically in terms of no motion blur during panning shots, and contrast


the movie itself?

hmm....

its got "Cameron" elements - definitely the first 15-20 minutes which I can watch again and again (I am watching the start this evening at home ;)  ), and random pieces throughout which have his signature qualities, including the final battle

but its my least favourite, Cameron film, and that is saying something as a big Cameron fan....

its not a bad film, but he has lost all the cool characters, and endlessly quotable dialogue of his previous movies :(

Just how are you managing to watch even a portion at home?

I think the " ;) " says it all.  Unless the poster lives in a multiplex, there's no need to ask because the answer is obvious.

Actually, I was was really thinking he had a legitimate method, maybe a screener of some sort, but you're right.  Particularly when I take note of his user name.

I finally saw this in 3D about a week or so ago. It was okay, but I don't think it really gained that much over the 2D viewing that I saw. The most immersive aspect of the 3D was the dust motes and ash that floated through the air at times. At those points in time, a person felt like they could have reached out and touched the stuff. One thing I found distracting is that the 3D version seemed soft and blurry a lot of time, especially in medium and long distance shots. I didn't see or notice as much blurriness in the 2D version. I don't know if the blurriness is a function of the 3D filming process or the digital projection, but the 3D version definitely seemed softer to me than the 2D one.

Wouldn't you know it? Two weeks ago, I drove 300 kilometres, round trip, to see this film in 3D. It was snowing on the way back and the road was slippery, but you wouldn't have been able to tell from the way people were driving. Cars were passing me doing a 110+ km/hr and I witnessed two guys in 4X4 pickups almost lose it. In one of the incidents, I thought I was going to be wearing the guy's sled trailer. My car gets machine gunned from end to end with rocks by a passing SUV, driven by an idiot who had the need to get home a whole ten minutes earlier than me. As he is passing, he sprays so much slush onto my windshield that it blinds me. I had to hit the brakes because I couldn't see where I was going and was worried about driving off the road. Today, I hear on the radio that starting tomorrow at noon our local cinema will now be able to play 3D movies and, sure enough, the first one is going to be this one. Par for the course in my life.

This always amazes me.  It never matters what the road conditions are, there are always the idiots who are going to drive like it's 72 and sunny on the Daytona Speedway.

I watched Avatar again yesterday and two plot point questions came up.  Of course I've had a senior moment and forgotten one so here's the one I do remember.

Jake has just been introduced to the Tree Souls and shortly thereafter we see Grace and crew watching a video of the Tree of Souls.  How did they get the video?  We've never seen Jake in avatar from with a video camera.

Ah, senior moment solved.  In the climactic battle we see Jake communicating with Neytiri, Norm, and Tsu'tey via some device around their necks.  Whose technology is this, human or navi?

1) I assume he took the images on a later flight or that he had a small camera secreted for that one.
2) That is human technology.  We have it now.  It is an ear-bud (which may be optional) and a throat receiver that lets you talk like you do with a bluetooth.  Special Forces uses them.

They are using that technology when Jake first lands on Pandora.

I have a question, and this is the first place I've been able to ask it. How much of the (now) 2.4 billion dollars that avatar has made does James Cameron get? I mean, his cut has to be pretty substantial, right?

Apologies if this is a repost, but here is an informed review:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o9Fod9KigU

 My first viewing was in IMAX 3D, I enjoyed the special effects and the message but felt that generally the movie was "predictable".

Watched again today in DLP 3D which was more visually rewarding. Got emotional more that once and was very happy that this film had such a huge audience.

Smokin' hot aliens. 

That is just absolutely hilarious.

Avatar...changed my life.  Everything I have worked for, achieved, and aspire towards is meaningless now.  My mediocre life is bland and unbearable.  If lost all motivation to attend school and work, knowing my peers dont speak the language of Pandora.  I painted a hammock green and hung it over my bed to symbolize the giant leaf I yearn to sleep in.  I drink out of large, funnel shaped leaves to symbolize my attachment to the environment.  I hunted my own dog.  I long for Jake Sully.  My obsession is more than a problem. It dominates my life. Soon Ill find you Pandora...soon.

Here's a fascinating article about the final steps in creating the numerous deliverables for Avatar's December release.

Hollywood Reporter: How Avatar Changed the Rules of Deliverables

I never imagined there were so many "versions" of the film to consider.

As an aside, I think this article is just one more reason why Cameron, IMO, should have won the Oscar for best Directing.  No matter how you slice it, the amount of time and effort that went into Avatar is at least an order of magnitude greater than any other filmmaker up for the award.  Yes, effort alone doesn't win awards, but when you couple what he went through with the incredible successes both critically and commercially that Avatar has seen, his accomplishment is one that won't be equalled for a very long time, if ever.

I found the movie completely unrealistic. If their main goal was simply the ore, then why not do a orbital bombardment? I'm sure there are plenty of asteroids in the system. And if they have the ability travel long distances in 6 years that means they can accelerate mass to near light speeds. The world would be a glowing plasma ball but they could still extract the ore.

Um, what?

lol, must have been breathing a little too much of that Pandoran atmosphere... 

Um, no.

 

Let's assume you theorize they could win an asteroid or something at it.  The problem would be that you'd cause massive planetary chaos, and the fact that water is present, etc. means you'd turn it into a big molten rock, as you point out.  It's a lot easier to dig through dirt and basic debris then it is to set down on an earthquake ridden unstable planet with an immense surface temperature and try to mine anything.  

Or, if your idea is just "nuke everything", well, there are problems with that too.. if you leave it full of radiation, then what you extract as far as ore would require a great deal of work to get it safe to transport etc. for radiation sake.

Generally, you try to take the most simple method possible.  Remember, they point out this is a company, not a government effort.  A company is responsible to the shareholders, as they point out in the film.  Way to risky to do anything that potentially completely destroys what you're going there to get.  Too big of a gamble.  None of those who invest would go along.

Simple answer -------> If the script had them lobbing asteroids at the planet then there is no story and, therefore, no movie.

This is absolutely the most ridiculous, most stupidest criticism of the movie I've heard yet! 
And NO.  I won't apologize for my harsh words.

Did you see last week's episode of 30 Rock where Liz and Nancy (Julianne Moore) go to a singles night and that start talking about Avatar? Liz turns off a potential suitor by taking the movie very seriously, and telling him he was wrong about the military vs ex-military angle. Nancy asks "Why did you do that?" and Liz says "What? I guess we could just sit here and be wrong!"

The orbital bombardment comment reminds me of this.

And why does anybody think a non-military entity would have a nuke?  They don't currently, and there is no reason to think they would in 150 years.

Only major militaries have nukes, except through illegal proliferation.

At the risk of continuing a hypothetical discussion  

Nuclear weapons would not be necessary to blast Pandora.  Any civilization that has the technology for interstellar travel, especially at the scale depicted in the film could either use orbiting mass drivers or attach engines and navigation packages to asteroids and steer them to the planet.  Of course that wouldn't be the film that Cameron envisioned. 

- Walter.

As opposed to now, when there is no story, at least no new or original one, but still a movie ;)

Putting arguments of freshness or originality aside, there is still a story in Cameron's version of Avatar; whereas, Allaun Silverfox's version would have ended before it had even begun.

Anyone else have the hots for Neytiri?

This is really irrational. I've had crushes on live actresses before (starting with Shirley MacLaine as Princess Aouda in AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS), but as Neytiri is a computer-generated character, I find that I am really confused. I have seen Zoe Sandala and find her very attractive, but this 10' blue creature on Pandora really turns me on. Humanoid enough not to be off-puttingly alien, with only animal-like ears, flat nose bridge, big yellow eyes and blue skin to set her apart from humans, I find this character incredibly sensual. I am sure the people who designed her meant for me to feel this way in order to increase my emotional involvement, but this really introduces some fairly complex feelings in me. Am I the only one? (If so, I'd better seek professional help!)  

Congratulations, you're a furry.