_Avatar_, directed by James Cameron

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2746 of them)
Titanic In Space then?

Stone Monkey (Stone Monkey), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:34 (6 years ago) Permalink

"My Spaceship Will Go On"

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:35 (6 years ago) Permalink

Kinda mystified that a distant planet full of hot, lonely female aliens is considered a non-hilarious subject for a science-fiction film.

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:42 (6 years ago) Permalink

Sounds a lot like Fallen Dragon by Peter F. Hamilton (which is less than 11 years ago, so I'm not accusing big Jim of plagarism or anything).

chap (chap), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:46 (6 years ago) Permalink

Kinda mystified that a distant planet full of hot, lonely female aliens is considered a non-hilarious subject for a science-fiction film.

Earth Girls Are Easy...? Anyone...?

If you fuck with Jimmy Mod, you call down the thunder (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:47 (6 years ago) Permalink

It sounds more like Queen of Outer Space
Which, I think, is some of Zsa Zsa Gabor's best work...

Stone Monkey (Stone Monkey), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

I'm just waiting on Orson Scott Card's novelization.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

"Not only is this groundbreaking technologically, but it's an intimate story set against an epic canvas,"...

Wait is this about Avatar or The Fountain, and which one will history smile on more?

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

Anyway, when I read this thread title, I thought for one self-shitting second that James Cameron was going to direct an Avatar: The Last Airbender movie.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

And not self-shitting in a good way.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 15:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

Sounds like Aquaman.

Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 16:03 (6 years ago) Permalink

ok weirdly enough m night shyamalan ALSO announced he's making a movie called avatar today

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:12 (6 years ago) Permalink

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

That is the most bummerest of bummer things I have ever seen. I weep.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:28 (6 years ago) Permalink

LIVE-ACTION. WRITTEN DIRECTED AND PRODUCED BY SHMAMLAMAN. DO. NOT. WANT.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:29 (6 years ago) Permalink

So this is like Enemy Mine, but not gay?

milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:31 (6 years ago) Permalink

Yes. Unfortunately, it is the not gay, not interracial Enemy Mine.

That said, it's still better than Emnacht fucking up the only TV show I can think of that I actually like. (Not that I ever watch it or anything, but the point still stands.)

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:40 (6 years ago) Permalink

Comets on Fire should sue both of 'em.

rock and roll for the rock and roll soul (nate_patrin), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:51 (6 years ago) Permalink

Because
James Cameron also is about to film a new project titled "Avatar," the films could end up in a showdown over their titles. Cameron's camp said he began his "Avatar" screenplay 12 years ago. Both camps say they have registered the title with the Motion Picture Assn. of America.

I look forward to a highlander stylee battle between Cameron and Shymalan.

N.i.c.o.l.e (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

Knowing Shyamalan he will end up submitting and calling his something atrocious and puke-worthy like Boy Of The Clouds.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:03 (6 years ago) Permalink

No no, wait, Unbendable.*

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:03 (6 years ago) Permalink

*this is funnier if you watch the show, I promise

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:04 (6 years ago) Permalink

I look forward to a highlander stylee battle between Cameron and Shymalan.

I would pay money.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:11 (6 years ago) Permalink

The best thing about it is that at least one of them dies!

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

Comets on Fire should sue both of 'em.

Avatar... the Nickelodeon show has been on since Feb 05. Dibs.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:30 (6 years ago) Permalink

The best thing about it is that at least one of them dies!

We can do better than that.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:34 (6 years ago) Permalink

2 years pass...

I had forgotten I'd started this thread. Which article of ultrahype/'will change movies forever!' has amused you most?

Ned Raggett, Friday, 19 June 2009 16:21 (3 years ago) Permalink


Eazy, Friday, 26 June 2009 04:02 (3 years ago) Permalink

This movie will change the way I view 3-D James Cameron movies entitled Avatar, that I'm sure of.

dorkus malorkus (latebloomer), Friday, 26 June 2009 04:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

i'm off the Sam Worthington train if this is terrible

wilter, Friday, 26 June 2009 04:25 (3 years ago) Permalink

4 weeks pass...

Comic-Con bits:

The audience, many of whom camped alongside the “Twilight” fans for the privilege, were treated to a sequence of scenes condensing the tale: Jake Sully is a paralyzed Marine who volunteers to become an Avatar -- a genetically engineered human/Na’vi hybrid. He suffers several brushes with some dinosaur-types, a violent flirtation with a Na’vi princess, and an even more violent Na’vi rite of initiation.

Cameron will get to test-run the film on an even bigger crowd on Aug. 21, which he’s declared "Avatar Day." The filmmaker announced he’ll be taking over IMAX and 3-D theaters around the world to screen 15 minutes of the film for moviegoers for free.

In introducing the film, Cameron said it was made “for the 14-year-old boy that is very alive and well in the back of my mind.”

But don’t expect a film for kids. In fact, I'd wager “Avatar” is going to be kind of heavy.

“I don’t want to say it’s important, because then it sounds like you’re making a documentary,” Cameron said. But it’s “something with a conscience. In the enjoying of [the film], it maybe makes you think about the way you interact with nature and your fellow man.”

After the screening, it was clear cast members Sigourney Weaver, Zoe Saldana and Stephen Lang had become as immersed and invested in Pandora as the filmmaker himself, speaking of the Na’vi as though they were a historical fact.

A professor at USC worked two years on develop their language, and Saldana said all the actors had to take movement classes to “de-humanize” themselves. She also trained in Wushu, horseback riding, archery and weightlifting to play Na’vi princess Neytiri.

Said Cameron: “We know the oncology and composition of the atmosphere, the geography and species of plants, the culture and the history of the Na’vi people.”

Dehumanize yourself, via all these human activities.

Ned Raggett, Friday, 24 July 2009 04:42 (3 years ago) Permalink

Plus more geekery via Nikki Finke's cohorts.

Ned Raggett, Friday, 24 July 2009 04:54 (3 years ago) Permalink

Nate Carson, Friday, 24 July 2009 08:46 (3 years ago) Permalink

3 weeks pass...

TRAILER

Alba, Tuesday, 18 August 2009 19:20 (3 years ago) Permalink

I'd go.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 18 August 2009 19:30 (3 years ago) Permalink

Avatard

velko, Tuesday, 18 August 2009 19:31 (3 years ago) Permalink

A bit disappointing, really.

J4mi3 H4rl3y (Snowballing), Tuesday, 18 August 2009 19:31 (3 years ago) Permalink

Lulz at "Avetar"...

Bill A, Tuesday, 18 August 2009 19:36 (3 years ago) Permalink

http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/avatar/hd/

maybe corny

Spencer Chow, Thursday, 20 August 2009 18:25 (3 years ago) Permalink

the cgi blue "people" look pretty cgi

i have the new brutal truth if you want it (latebloomer), Thursday, 20 August 2009 18:27 (3 years ago) Permalink

duh i guess. some nice visuals otherwise.

funny how District 9 which cost maybe a 10th of what this cost still has better looking cgi characters.

i have the new brutal truth if you want it (latebloomer), Thursday, 20 August 2009 18:29 (3 years ago) Permalink

cgi cgi cgi

i have the new brutal truth if you want it (latebloomer), Thursday, 20 August 2009 18:47 (3 years ago) Permalink

So much for the "revolutionary" CGI. Looks like one big video game cut-scene

Number None, Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:28 (3 years ago) Permalink

AVATAR takes us to a spectacular new world beyond our imagination, where a reluctant hero embarks on a journey of redemption and discovery, as he leads a heroic battle to save a civilization. The film was first conceived by Cameron 14 years ago, when the means to realize his vision did not yet exist. Now, after four years of actual production work, AVATAR delivers a fully immersive cinematic experience of a new kind, where the revolutionary technology invented to make the film, disappears into the emotion of the characters and the sweep of the story.

velko, Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:31 (3 years ago) Permalink

Every time I see this title I think it's that Bruce Willis Second Life spoof.

Dom J. Palladino (Noodle Vague), Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:34 (3 years ago) Permalink

cue ishtar joke?

wow does this ever (unexpectedly) look like one of those cheap direct-to-video super-scifi cheap CGI thingies.

no sign of the "whole new world of real-feeling characters thing". seems way more Polar Express than gollum...

sean gramophone, Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:35 (3 years ago) Permalink

will the .1 of 5.1 be used to immerse us in this bold, new vision???

Fox Force Five Punchline (sexyDancer), Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:38 (3 years ago) Permalink

Kind of gives off a Matrix sequels vibe too. Maybe it's the dreadlocks

Number None, Thursday, 20 August 2009 20:41 (3 years ago) Permalink

i have the new brutal truth if you want it (latebloomer), Thursday, 20 August 2009 21:53 (3 years ago) Permalink

few if any major conservative organizations took up arms against it.

There was definitely at least one. I am having trouble remembering whether it was over fundamentalist concerns (movie is animist/pagan) or nationalist ones (movie likes terrorism)

Hierophantiasis (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:00 (1 year ago) Permalink

you said no one is claiming that avatar is still culturally relevant, i quoted contenderizer at least being 'agnostic' about my assertion that it isn't; i'm not sure why he would post that other than to imply that it might still be relevant, which... it isn't.

― JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, May 8, 2012 1:57 PM (41 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i voiced my "agnostic" doubts simply to make the point that unfounded claims are unfounded. i quibble with the unsupported blanket assertion that the film never meant anything to anyone.

i agree, fwiw, that avatar has dropped precipitously off the cultural radar. i came into this round of the discussion agreeing on that point and haven't changed my position.

beyond that, i've only defended what i see as the film's strengths, primarily thematic but also cinematic.

10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:04 (1 year ago) Permalink

dear lord it's almost 5 PM

we ALL win.

Hierophantiasis (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:06 (1 year ago) Permalink

no? you said no one is claiming that avatar is still culturally relevant, i quoted contenderizer at least being 'agnostic' about my assertion that it isn't; i'm not sure why he would post that other than to imply that it might still be relevant, which... it isn't.

Your assertion, if I've traced it back right, is that the film had no cultural currency, that it was garbage from the start, that no-one connected to it. This seems like the same argument as goole/Adam earlier, that people only went to it for the hype. If I've got you/contenderiser wrong sorry about that, but I don't think he's arguing what you think he is.

Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:07 (1 year ago) Permalink

i quibble with the unsupported blanket assertion that the film never meant anything to anyone.

i quibble w ur strawman tbh

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

y'all

"the general mainstream" is not synonymous with "everyone, ever"

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

So we're looking at the world's biggest cult hit?

Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:11 (1 year ago) Permalink

it's the opposite of a cult hit! everybody saw it but nobody cared about it much after a while.

goole, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:12 (1 year ago) Permalink

^^^^^^^^^^^

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

Right, but still we get back to $1,000,000 gross on week 17.

Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

to be fair that's about $28 without 3D

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:17 (1 year ago) Permalink

Not to mention the $4,000,000 on 800 screens when it was re-released four months after that - that's what fascinating, that there were still people who couldn't get enough of this film that's faded from cultural view since.

Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:18 (1 year ago) Permalink

I think the porn industry usually has the answers here

frogbs, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:20 (1 year ago) Permalink

i quibble w ur strawman tbh

no one was ever going to give a fuck about jake sulee and the noble blue people, and no one was going to go nuts over the story from fern gully and dances with wolves and a billion other movies.
i don't think i'm exaggerating your dismissal of the idea that anyone might ever have cared about the film. you've claimed that the film meant nothing substantial to its audience even at the time, and that it certainly doesn't matter to anyone now. i disagree, personally (i genuinely liked the film then and still do, and i know that i'm not alone in this), and i have my doubts as a general assessment of popular opinion.

i do agree that the film has lost its pop cultural currency. that's it.

10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:22 (1 year ago) Permalink

ok great semantics i'm out

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:24 (1 year ago) Permalink

Not to mention the $4,000,000 on 800 screens when it was re-released four months after that - that's what fascinating, that there were still people who couldn't get enough of this film that's faded from cultural view since.

― Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, May 8, 2012 2:18 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm. the fade is fascinating, imo. it doesn't necessarily prove anything specific about the film or its place in the long-term cultural memory, what posterity will say, but it does raise a lot if interesting questions.

10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

People forget there was "mega-schadenfreude" that preceded "Titanic," too. Which of course had its own horrible script, etc., but it at least had characters you cared about. And it was totally all about class, maaaaaan. At a time of great economic prosperity! Subversive, man, subversive.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:29 (1 year ago) Permalink

Is there usually mega-schadenfreude whenever a film is too long in production and known to be way over budget, or does the director have to be sort of widely-resented first?

Hierophantiasis (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:58 (1 year ago) Permalink

I think there needs to be some degree of hubris and/or ambition involved, sure. But I'm not sure mega-schadenfreude became a thing until the "Heaven's Gate" to "Ishtar" era, when over-budget Hollywood career/studio-killing disasters became a big punchline.

I will say that, pre-"Titanic," I don't think Cameron was resented, though he was ambitious. Post "Titanic," sure, he made a nice target. But then, if "10-foot tall blue people in 3-D" doesn't bring the advance LOLs ...

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

Don't forget Liz's Cleopatra though...

Hierophantiasis (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:41 (1 year ago) Permalink

While it was in theatres: "It's a lot better than you think." "The 3d is amazing."

As soon as it was out of theatres: "Should I see this through Netflix?" "See what? Oh, probably not."

I think it has the cultural relevance of the halloween blizzard of '91. If you're from the midwest, you know what I mean. If not, don't worry about it.

I guess it has relevance in that it helped to hasten the switch from film to digital, generate a buzz around 3D, and forced a lot of early adapters to spend a lot of money.

a la bouquet marmoset (Austerity Ponies), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:54 (1 year ago) Permalink

otm. 50 years from now it'll be like "the robe"-- "wait, THAT was the move that put digital projection and 3D on the map? and a zillion people went to see it? um, alright."

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

that's assuming our civilization is still intact in 50 years

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

it'll become a gnostic gospel in our post-civilization forest society

et tu, twinkletoes? (remy bean), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:13 (1 year ago) Permalink

Titanic used class the way countless romances have, except the template is usually poor girl-rich boy.

"10-foot tall blue people in 3-D" doesn't bring the advance LOLs

/racist

World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:24 (1 year ago) Permalink

"culturally irrelevant" until hype for avatar 2 starts & ppl pretend forget that the 1st one was shit, paint selves blue

johnny crunch, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

...And the 'poorish' girl-rich boy thing is there, but it's to stomp on snarling Billy Zane.

xp

World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:26 (1 year ago) Permalink

Billy Zane. I don't know why, but that dude puts me off.

He's sick of the Swiss. He don't like em. (Austerity Ponies), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:31 (1 year ago) Permalink

mean

A Little Princess btw (s1ocki), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 17:04 (1 year ago) Permalink

I hate Zane too. Total movie-killer.

Hierophantiasis (Jon Lewis), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 17:39 (1 year ago) Permalink

You know which movie's incredibly high place on the adjusted B.O. gross list always shocks me? The Sting. Now there's a movie with a seemingly limited cultural cachet.

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 17:49 (1 year ago) Permalink

Unless that just represented the perfect storm apex of '70s nostalgia.

jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 17:49 (1 year ago) Permalink

the sting rules

A Little Princess btw (s1ocki), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 18:43 (1 year ago) Permalink

^ otm

10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:22 (1 year ago) Permalink

"culturally irrelevant" until hype for avatar 2 starts & ppl pretend forget that the 1st one was shit, paint selves blue

― johnny crunch, Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:25 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

have been thinking about that throughout this discussion. cameron's supposedly got two sequels in the pipeline. if they're hits on anything like avatar's scale, then i suspect that all this "culturally irrelevant" talk will seem a little silly in hindsight. "invisible in the moment, from where i'm standing" isn't precisely the same as "irrelevant", after all.

10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:35 (1 year ago) Permalink

This movie didn't come across anti-war, it came across more pro-one dimensional woodland tribal innocents vs. one dimensional US military racists. Maybe slightly more anti-war than Star Wars in that the idyllic Navi is far more hippie than the rebels. But still, total time showing military technology, lingering on awesome attack helicopters, glorifying explosions, etc. Still felt like it glorified war, only in a context that made it way easy for left wingers to want one side to win.

Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:41 (1 year ago) Permalink

yeah, i wouldn't call avatar anti-war in general. any antiwar reading is stymied by cameron's obsession with heroic combat and military tech. hell, it's pro-war if anything.

it does take a strong stance against imperialist aggression (lol safe targets) and not-so-subtly critiques america's military "adventurism" in the middle east (esp in just-post-bush-era context).

10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:50 (1 year ago) Permalink

have been thinking about that throughout this discussion. cameron's supposedly got two sequels in the pipeline. if they're hits on anything like avatar's scale, then i suspect that all this "culturally irrelevant" talk will seem a little silly in hindsight. "invisible in the moment, from where i'm standing" isn't precisely the same as "irrelevant", after all.

― 10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Wednesday, May 9, 2012 4:35 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

or they could be like the star wars prequels and make a shit-ton of money without anybody really being that enthusiastic about them.

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:54 (1 year ago) Permalink

honestly re. the question of whether avatar is anti-imperialism or anti-bush or something just solicits a "who cares?" from me. the stakes are pretty much nil.

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:55 (1 year ago) Permalink

loving how the matrix: revolutions is still culturally relevant in 2012, it's a popular cultural touchstone among my friends

dayo, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:56 (1 year ago) Permalink

People who left the movie wishing they could be a blue person vs. people who left the movie wishing they could ride in one of those high-tech military body suits.

or they could be like the star wars prequels and make a shit-ton of money without anybody really being that enthusiastic about them.

Stressing again, little kids LOVED these. That is, I have never heard a little kid play Luke. They all want to be Anakin, for play, for Halloween, for whatever. Mission accomplished, Lucas.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:56 (1 year ago) Permalink

"Matrix" sequels remain undeniably relevant as examples of "what not to do."

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 21:57 (1 year ago) Permalink

"Matrix" sequels remain undeniably relevant as examples of "what not to do."

― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, May 9, 2012 4:57 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah, these are some of the worst studio pictures of the last 20 years.

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 22:01 (1 year ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.