_Avatar_, directed by James Cameron

Shit. I should probably dust off my old 3D resume. It's gonna be a growth industry again...

i saw it 3d, no imax, and was not impressed. glad to see i was not alone in perving over michelle rodriguez in 3d :O

actually the best part was when we walked out and there was this 7 ft tall guy coming into the theater. my dad saw him first was like "holy shit!"

Thursday
12/31

AVATAR

$14,925,000

SQUEAKQUEL

$8,750,000

HOLMES

$8,720,000

should cross $300 million tomorrow

which is prob abt how much it actually cost

That sounds about right. I remember reading somewhere (maybe earlier in this thread?) that it cost $300 million to film, and another $150 million for advertising.

$500 million is a more realistic estimate

ur a more realistic estimate

Oh. Well, this Vanity Fair article cites estimates from $230 to $500 million, and says that $280 million (for production costs alone) is probably the closest.

http://www.chud.com/articles/articles/21496/1/THE-BATTLE-OF-AVATAR039S-BUDGET/Page1.html

i think cameron was under some kind of contract clause to keep production costs under $300 m, so somehow he'll figure out a way to make it look like that whatever the real story is.

this was unmitigated shit

ie, another Best Picture speech on the way! ka-ching

the 3-d is annoying and distracting. would probably need to know about perceptual psychology to say why, but imo in most instances it does nothing interesting and draws attention to irrelevant things. more damagingly it splits the image, quite brutally, into separate panes. why do this? it also dulls the colours.

it was long and boring. the lead character had negative charisma, and he along with everyone else had to work with a completely terrible script. 'the abyss' isn't perfect, but it has an emotional core and characters you give an f about. the central relationship here was furry-friendly crap. it can't be that hard to write stock characters like ribisi's, lang's, and weaver's, and yet all three are paper-thin.

plot was basic but still didn't make sense. do the blue people "get" what avatars are? this doesn't seem to be explained: the avatars are clearly marked out by their clothing. worthington carries a gun. and saldana almost kills him for no reason.

all of the tree-hugging stuff is obviously an embarrassment and it takes up probably a third of the movie.

was not expecting a masterpiece but the easy ride this has received from critics is shameful shit.

Oh. Well, this Vanity Fair article cites estimates from $230 to $500 million, and says that $280 million (for production costs alone) is probably the closest.

― Quiet, I'm making my Youtube Star Wars Review (Z S), Saturday, 2 January 2010 00:54 (Yesterday) Permalink

But it also says that the 280 doesn't include the R&D involved in making the cameras, the 3d tech etc. I can't understand how anyone wouldn't consider that a production cost...

So it needs to make about a billion, which I guess it will. I question whether people will be interested in two more Ferngully 3Ds though. I guess the sequels will be cheaper?

Considering that probably a lot of the budget went into developing technology and character designs that would be re-used in any sequels, I'm sure they wouldn't cost as much.

But it also says that the 280 doesn't include the R&D involved in making the cameras, the 3d tech etc. I can't understand how anyone wouldn't consider that a production cost...

Yeah, I had the same thought. But I imagine that finding outside funding for R&D would be easier, because any new technological "developments" (har har) would be useful for others, not just the Avatar team. So I would guess that R&D isn't included as a production cost because other outside, non-Avatar interests helped to pay for it.

finally saw this, it was easily an hour too long and the last hour was the most boring thing ever. the tree-hugging stuff got tired but not as tired as the relentless blowing up of shit at the end which was just mind-numbing, and by that point the novelty of both the cgi and the 3d was completely taken for granted. also, miliatary dude drinking coffee while blowing crap up easily the worst character in any movie I've seen in ages. both led guy and weaver were awful except when cgi, maybe this was intended in order to breathe more life into the cgi characters. all that said, it was still okay.

also voice over was awful

there were so many things bad about this I'm not sure why I still kind of liked it. starved for entertainment I guess

u liked it because it was AWESOME

duh

this wasn't as entertaining as My Bloody Valentine in 3-D

this is unmitigated shit, and yet i still had a good-ass time watchin it in IMAX 3D after a day at the zoo.

as a tech demo, it's pretty fukkin amazing. am cautiously optimistic that we get a crop of dope sci fi movies in the next few years that can marry it to scripts that aren't woeful

this would have been fine if all the excesses had been tamed (plot excesses that is, like over-the-top miliary boneheads, over-the-top tree hugging, over-the-top relentless neverending battle)

will it take the dvd release for everyone to realize how crappy this movie is?

For sure. I have yet to see a 3-D movie - any 3-D movie - that was remotely watchable at home in 2-D. Well, maybe "Coraline" excepted. Then again, "Coraline" was well written. "Avatar" - I enjoyed the hell of it, but damned if I can't recall a single character's name outside of the lead. If it has anything going for it, it's that it's not totally steeped in portent like the "Lord of the Rings" flicks. But its very dopiness will make any potential post-Oscar excitement crash like, well, "Crash." I mean, I've seen "The Hurt Locker" a couple of times now, and the second viewing was even richer than the first. A second viewing of "Avatar" would likely totally deflate any enjoyment I had of it the first time around. I'd concentrated even more on the pretty foliage and ignore anything that talks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/03/avatar-rules-tops-1-billi_n_409804.html

movie reminded me of this passage from John Crowley's Engine Summer, in that as much as I wanted to just enjoy the few good things it had to offer, in the end this fucking movie is definitely a part of the problem

the mechanical dreams the angels made with great labor and inconceivable ingenuity, dreams broadcast on the air like milkweed seeds, all day long, passing invisibly through the air, through walls, through stone walls, through the very bodies of the angels themselves as they sat to await them, and appearing through every angel simultaneously, to warn and to instruct, one dream dreamed by all so they could act in concert, until it was discovered that the dreams passing through their bodies were poisonous to them somehow, don't ask me how, and millions were sickening and dying young and unable to bear children, but unable to stop the dreaming even when the dreams themselves warned them that the dreams were poisoning them, unable or afraid to wake and find themselves alone

milton, john crowley's review of avatar ~
Yes, I went out and made history, seeing Avatar on the day after Christmas. I found it delightful all through -- I was never bored and often thrilled and elated. That was by the astonishing and convincing 3D effects, the care and attention lavished on every detail of every moment -- the 300M that Cameron spent was all on show. The scenes in the Floating Mountains (whose gravitational oddity was never explained; maybe something ot do with the huge planet around which the moon Pandora revolves? Nemmine: Lots wasn't explained, and much was unexplainable).
there's more here
http://crowleycrow.livejournal.com/

ha, wow

he's a little kinder on it than I felt overall

lool

saw it this weekend....

well, it's certainly pretty corny in a lot of ways...

seemed like something written by a gifted 15 year old sci-fi fan.

but that said, the visuals and 3D etc were really cool to see, the na'vi were way cooler in the context than i thought they would be.

it's a lot to look at and genuinely sorta awe inspiring at points.

plotline was boiler plate sci-fi/fantasy jizz, but it did make me realize just how convoluted and poorly ploted a lot of current blockbuster efx epics are - thinking transformers, the new star wars movies, pirates of the carribean, etc..

like it was almost refreshing to have a plot that established the main characters, the villains, and a main conflict in a sensible way, then actually went about a textbook a-to-b resolution of the plot.

not that that should be something to PRAISE, but in the current times i guess it is...like going back to the student thing, it seemed like someone had paid attention to a freshman film writing class and tried to follow the "rules" at least....which is a lot more than you can say about the other films i mentioned.

this wasn't as entertaining as My Bloody Valentine in 3-D

― Ward Fowler, Sunday, January 3, 2010 7:26 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

can't believe i missed the possible I WISH THEY'D GIVEN OUT EARPLUGS FOR AVATAR joek here.

http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2010/01/james-camerons-avatar-disneys-pocahontas

plotline was boiler plate sci-fi/fantasy jizz, but it did make me realize just how convoluted and poorly ploted a lot of current blockbuster efx epics are - thinking transformers, the new star wars movies, pirates of the carribean, etc..

like it was almost refreshing to have a plot that established the main characters, the villains, and a main conflict in a sensible way, then actually went about a textbook a-to-b resolution of the plot.

not that that should be something to PRAISE, but in the current times i guess it is...like going back to the student thing, it seemed like someone had paid attention to a freshman film writing class and tried to follow the "rules" at least....which is a lot more than you can say about the other films i mentioned.

I think this is very OTM

ppl pissed at Sigourney Weaver smoking, get a life

hahahaha waht

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/business/04smoke.html?scp=2&sq=avatar%20smoking&st=cse

"For the record, apart from the 3-D tobacco use, Mr. Glantz said he found “Avatar” to be “a great movie.”"

... and that he was happy to give them a bit of free publicity.

yeah M@tt otm, the straightforward storytelling was in a weird way one of its strengths, as much as it could've benefitted from some more fleshed out characters of a goddamn subplot

or characters that were interesting or engaging in any way at all imo

It was a very good thing IMO that the world itself was so enthralling that it didn't matter very much that every character besides Jake and Neytiri was wafer thin.

I think that blindly devouring tons and tons of pulpy, terrible sceince fiction and fantasy novels have made me ultra-receptive to movies like this.

btw i cannot see this winning best picture

Right now, I don't even know what is going to end up being nominated, last year was generally terrible for me re: seeing movies.

I think that blindly devouring tons and tons of pulpy, terrible sceince fiction and fantasy novels have made me ultra-receptive to movies like this.

― i accidentally touched the nub and it was squishy (HI DERE), Tuesday, January 5, 2010 3:00 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

posts v much in character and also otm for me.

like, it was objectively BAD (plot/dialogue) but i loved watching it

yeah, pretty much true for me too. though i didn't LOVE it on any level.

I was very surprised at how well the actors dealt with the dialogue.

I can't support the argument that the plot was bad. It was very simple, but that helped the overall movie; trying to graft psychological headfuckery onto those visuals likely would have detracted from both.

well it was bad because it was cookie-cutter

I don't like equating "bad" with "predictable". I pretty much knew exactly what was going to happen at all times but that didn't affect my enjoyment of the movie.

this will be nominated for best picture but it ain't winning it
gonna get a shit ton of technical awards though.