Part of that is the fault of the publishers. At one time, 50-60K words was considered a novel. Now many publishers won't even consider a story under 100K words. Gotta fill the chapters somehow.
- Status
Part of that is the fault of the publishers. At one time, 50-60K words was considered a novel. Now many publishers won't even consider a story under 100K words. Gotta fill the chapters somehow.[/QUOTE]
How about with story? It takes more pages to tell that info through story, and is more interesting to do so, than to have it be info-dumped on the reader through narrative or an exposition mouthpiece character.
Z
Zarvox
Man. That sounds pretty awesome. If the movie focuses on this instead just being a pure "The poor Indians" flick then I'm interested in it.[/QUOTE]
Eh, some people get worked up over that. I really didn't – there's only like twenty minutes of 'those poor Indians.' Most of the first two thirds of the movie is A) playing around with characters that, while not the deepest I've ever seen, are still really fun and B) A really cool tour of an imaginative fantasy/sci-fi world. And the final third is crazy bad-ass. That said, all the hard sci-fi elements of the film are quite hidden and only slightly hinted at. That said, if you're paying attention, there's plenty to pick up on. I'm going back (this time in 3D) to see what else I can tease out of those hints.
fade
Staff member
Part of that is the fault of the publishers. At one time, 50-60K words was considered a novel. Now many publishers won't even consider a story under 100K words. Gotta fill the chapters somehow.[/QUOTE]
How about with story? It takes more pages to tell that info through story, and is more interesting to do so, than to have it be info-dumped on the reader through narrative or an exposition mouthpiece character.[/QUOTE]
I admit I don't know enough about publishing to say one way or the other.
I had an example in mind when I wrote this. I've been reading my son The Hobbit the past few months. If Tolkien was writing nowadays, he might have Bilbo sneak up on the trolls' fire and then break the action to describe the ecology of trolls, including their origin from the earth and their return to it when struck by sunlight. Instead, we learned most of the same about trolls through the action.
Part of that is the fault of the publishers. At one time, 50-60K words was considered a novel. Now many publishers won't even consider a story under 100K words. Gotta fill the chapters somehow.[/QUOTE]
How about with story? It takes more pages to tell that info through story, and is more interesting to do so, than to have it be info-dumped on the reader through narrative or an exposition mouthpiece character.[/QUOTE]
I admit I don't know enough about publishing to say one way or the other.
I had an example in mind when I wrote this. I've been reading my son The Hobbit the past few months. If Tolkien was writing nowadays, he might have Bilbo sneak up on the trolls' fire and then break the action to describe the ecology of trolls, including their origin from the earth and their return to it when struck by sunlight. Instead, we learned most of the same about trolls through the action.[/QUOTE]
Right, it's basic storytelling which a lot of authors today don't comprehend.
Just got back from it. Agree with most people here, spectacular visuals, slightly less spectacular story. I could predict almost everything that could happen, but I didn't mind because it was so much fun watching it all unfold.
I liked it a lot, and I'd definitely recommend it.
Also, I think Neytiri is hot, which is odd because I usually don't go for women taller than me.
I liked it a lot, and I'd definitely recommend it.
Also, I think Neytiri is hot, which is odd because I usually don't go for women taller than me.
Dunno what I think about the bioengineered idea. On one hand, it certainly makes a lot more sense than the current plot. On the other hand, it essentially undermines the current plot, since rather than being "in touch with nature" the Na'vi become in touch with a giant supercomputer. I doubt that's what Cameron had in mind, based on how blatant the symbology is in this movie.
This movie is gorgeous in 3D. Story was kinda lame, I suppose, however the idea of
The luminescent plants and other visuals really sold me, though.
the Na'vi and Pandora acting as some kind of giant information dump/transfer thing was cool.
R
Reboneer
Hey, that's the same spoiler I accidentally read as well. Before then, all I knew was 3D science fiction film by James Cameron, which was enough to convince me.
K
KarateKidMcFly
I really enjoyed the movie, though I recognize the story is derivative.
I found this article, though, which I found really interesting: http://chud.com/articles/articles/21969/1/PROJECT-880-THE-AVATAR-THAT-ALMOST-WAS/Page1.html
It compares the movie to an early scripment from right after Titanic came out. Really cool to see how some of the things changed. I think the movie is probably better without some of the things that were in the scripment; the movie was long enough as is, and I was getting antsy towards the end. But I think some of the stuff would be great in supplemental materials, maybe a World of Pandora documentary on the eventual DVD/Bluray release.
I found this article, though, which I found really interesting: http://chud.com/articles/articles/21969/1/PROJECT-880-THE-AVATAR-THAT-ALMOST-WAS/Page1.html
It compares the movie to an early scripment from right after Titanic came out. Really cool to see how some of the things changed. I think the movie is probably better without some of the things that were in the scripment; the movie was long enough as is, and I was getting antsy towards the end. But I think some of the stuff would be great in supplemental materials, maybe a World of Pandora documentary on the eventual DVD/Bluray release.
Just got back from it at the IMAX in 3D.
WOW.
WowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWow.
Yes, the story was every cliche and all it needed was songs to make it a Disney musical, but who cares? It was every cliche cooked to perfection and it was an orgasmic sensory overload of visuals. My wife and I were literally stunned by the immersion into the world on the screen, I honestly can't remember the last movie I saw where I felt so immersed into the world and the lives onscreen.
So no, it doesn't get an A+ for original storytelling but it does for taking what has become an old hat for me and making me care about it again.
WOW.
WowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWowWow.
Yes, the story was every cliche and all it needed was songs to make it a Disney musical, but who cares? It was every cliche cooked to perfection and it was an orgasmic sensory overload of visuals. My wife and I were literally stunned by the immersion into the world on the screen, I honestly can't remember the last movie I saw where I felt so immersed into the world and the lives onscreen.
So no, it doesn't get an A+ for original storytelling but it does for taking what has become an old hat for me and making me care about it again.
C
chakz
Man. That sounds pretty awesome. If the movie focuses on this instead just being a pure "The poor Indians" flick then I'm interested in it.[/QUOTE]
Eh, some people get worked up over that. I really didn't – there's only like twenty minutes of 'those poor Indians.' Most of the first two thirds of the movie is A) playing around with characters that, while not the deepest I've ever seen, are still really fun and B) A really cool tour of an imaginative fantasy/sci-fi world. And the final third is crazy bad-ass. That said, all the hard sci-fi elements of the film are quite hidden and only slightly hinted at. That said, if you're paying attention, there's plenty to pick up on. I'm going back (this time in 3D) to see what else I can tease out of those hints.[/QUOTE]
I'm glad you enjoyed yourself so much. I see if I can't catch it some time. Though there is so many movies out that i want to see I'll probably have to wait till it goes to dvd. It looks like the experience wouldn't be the same though.
If you have the chance chakz check it out in 3D. I can't stress enough just how amazing this movie looks and how well it uses the format.
I hate saying things like this, but the movie really is nearly worthless without 3D.
The movie was quite good. The 3D rocked. I hope the tech gets tweaked a little bit more. my eyes freaking hurt by the end of the film.
Cameron did a great job in Foreshadowing/Revealing the plot points.
Cameron did a great job in Foreshadowing/Revealing the plot points.
I avoid most info about films before going to watch them.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but that info is in the trailer. It's the premise of the movie.
I'm starting to get worried this is actually gonna win Best Picture as the Oscars' desperate attempt to get high ratings and prove the major awards aren't just for stuffy "art-house" movies no one sees. It's a real shame that they aren't gonna make this stand with a movie that is actually good.
Right, they should take this stand and give Transformers Revenge of the Fallen the Oscar Nod.
I avoid most info about films before going to watch them.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but that info is in the trailer. It's the premise of the movie.[/QUOTE]
I didn't watch the trailer. I actually avoid trailers if I'm not abismally bored and there's nothing else to do that watch a few trailers. I like to go to movies without knowing what their premise is.
But I was not complaining or anything, @li3n was just surprised that I didn't know about the wheelchair thing!
I love seeing movies without knowing much about the cast or anything what I'm in for. Moon was a great example of this this year, that I really loved, and loved not knowing the twist that was in the trailers. HOWEVER, this is one of the most-hyped movies of all time, so it's a little bit of a different case.
fade
Staff member
I actually disagree about the world immersion wow-factor. The FX and the world felt trite and done, too. They were well done, but nothing I felt I hadn't seen before. Even the heli-ship design and mechs were straight out of 50 other things. The Na'vi designs were boring and human. The landscapes were very Earth-like. The best FX were the 3-D computer interfaces, but even those are old news. I mean, sure, they were well-executed, but a well executed copy of a Rembrandt still looks like a Rembrandt.
ElJuski
Staff member
My friends paid for my ticket, and I got my money's worth, though I was far more impressed with it than I expected to be. Since my expectations were at a zero, I suppose that is a victory for Avatar.
The movie is cheesy as fuck, and doesn't get it. It wraps itself up in Importance and Gravitas, it purports itself to be a "love story" and it, like so many movies before it, exemplify the Noble Savage. The Na'vi were head slappingly horrible indian sterotypes, and didn't get to be interesting until way late into the film, when James Cameron decided to finally stop jerking off to how expensive the whole fucking thing was and got to making interesting visuals. I don't give a fuck that it cost how many millions of dollars, and I don't want to doddle for an hour and a half with impressive little CGI tech flourishes. The creatures all looked shiny and dumb; the lemurs were stupid, the Resident Evil dogs were stupid, the birds were stupid, and most of the plants were stupid. Cameron and crew just tried way too hard, which was ultimately distracting. I didn't feel immersed into an alien world at all; instead, I sat there going "Wowies look at all the money they poured into this shit."
What did the movie have going for it? A meager handful of actors that did seemingly understood the shlock they were in, and acted accordingly (or perhaps to the best of their ability, but same difference in the end). The film got somewhat interesting plot-wise towards the end, after the paint-by-numbers in the first hour and a half. The last battle was impressive visually, and actually lent towards some sort of forward motion story-wise instead of just jerking off the budget a little bit more.
So, yeah, it's not a complete waste as I thought it would be, and my cold heart was warmed over just enough. But it's still a dumb, dumb movie that, besides its budget, will be a forgotten relic of cinema.
The movie is cheesy as fuck, and doesn't get it. It wraps itself up in Importance and Gravitas, it purports itself to be a "love story" and it, like so many movies before it, exemplify the Noble Savage. The Na'vi were head slappingly horrible indian sterotypes, and didn't get to be interesting until way late into the film, when James Cameron decided to finally stop jerking off to how expensive the whole fucking thing was and got to making interesting visuals. I don't give a fuck that it cost how many millions of dollars, and I don't want to doddle for an hour and a half with impressive little CGI tech flourishes. The creatures all looked shiny and dumb; the lemurs were stupid, the Resident Evil dogs were stupid, the birds were stupid, and most of the plants were stupid. Cameron and crew just tried way too hard, which was ultimately distracting. I didn't feel immersed into an alien world at all; instead, I sat there going "Wowies look at all the money they poured into this shit."
What did the movie have going for it? A meager handful of actors that did seemingly understood the shlock they were in, and acted accordingly (or perhaps to the best of their ability, but same difference in the end). The film got somewhat interesting plot-wise towards the end, after the paint-by-numbers in the first hour and a half. The last battle was impressive visually, and actually lent towards some sort of forward motion story-wise instead of just jerking off the budget a little bit more.
So, yeah, it's not a complete waste as I thought it would be, and my cold heart was warmed over just enough. But it's still a dumb, dumb movie that, besides its budget, will be a forgotten relic of cinema.
ElJuski
Staff member
ahh crap maybe that was my problem.
I don't think THAT's true at all. It's gonna be in the top 5 all time grossers, easy, and it's going to be remembered as the first big 3D movie, and I'm sure future 3D movies will look back and thank this one for kicking the door open.
Also, I liked the "space marines" vs "tribesmen on horseback" bit a lot... It was like an excerpt from "Warhammer 40K, the movie".
I don't think THAT's true at all. It's gonna be in the top 5 all time grossers, easy, and it's going to be remembered as the first big 3D movie, and I'm sure future 3D movies will look back and thank this one for kicking the door open.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention that with the kind of cash this movie is likely to make we're going to see a sequel or two.
I avoid most info about films before going to watch them.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but that info is in the trailer. It's the premise of the movie.[/QUOTE]
I didn't watch the trailer. I actually avoid trailers if I'm not abismally bored and there's nothing else to do that watch a few trailers. I like to go to movies without knowing what their premise is.
But I was not complaining or anything, @li3n was just surprised that I didn't know about the wheelchair thing![/QUOTE]
I hear ya, Silver Jelly. Even hearing the TITLE of a movie is too much for me. When I go to the movies, I just say "One please" and when they ask what I wanna see, I tell them to grab me a ticket at random. Sometimes I don't even go into the movie they tell me, because the title is usually up by the theater number. I just run through the theater naked, rush into one of the auditoriums, and sit down with my popcorn.
I then put on my sensory-deprivation helmet for the trailers, until I believe the movie has started. Sometimes I miss a couple opening credits, but at least I haven't seen a single frame of a movie before actually seeing it. I am THAT hardcore.
Yeah, that's nice.
- Status