The _Avatar_ sequel, presumably also directed by James Cameron

Written by...well...

Unmasked at last!

I totally get where Brad is coming from, but I think the counter argument is legit, too: if the acting/writing/plot is good, a movie might have less need to be so visually resplendent/spectacular.

I think the other argument is, why are we demanding that a visual spectacle have a mega complex story when we lap up other action movies that are largely visual? it isn't as if Commando had a Charade-esque story going on.

I don't really think either Avatar story was 'bad' either. both of them tread common ground, have some broad-stroked baddies, and almost all of Giovanni Ribisi's dialogue was terrible in the first, but two spends a lot of time culture/world-building in a way that is very effective.

i think it's part of cameron's point with these movies tho, that if you build a compelling enough sandbox and hit the right story beats, you don't need that stuff. it's pure cinema, removing any vestigial elements of the stage

it was funny, back in 2009, with all of my theatre buddies railing against the piece, and listing all of the problems they had with it,which basically amounted to "we want movies to be like theatre"

cameron executed the story very well in both films (he knows structure!) but i massively prefer the "family of refugees attempts to adapt to new home" story to the dances with wolves/last samurai rip of the first one

The problem is the novelty of the visuals does wear off. It's a three hour movie!

I didn't hate this fwiw, just more of a *shrug*. I like JC's brand of cheese and would prefer he'd not spend what looks like the remainder of his career doing these movies over and over.

I'm sure Brad will dig it though. Enjoy!

And I also don't require some complex story at all. Just conflicts and characters that are interesting. I struggled to care about anyone in the movie.

Sigourney's the only one who popped for me.

Different strokes and all that, but I think that's a reason why Villeneuve's sci-fi streak has been so strong: they're visually striking while also being mostly well-written and acted (imo). It doesn't have to be theatrical (in the theatre sense), but compelling characters and actors carry a lot of weight. So I have no doubt this movie is visually amazing - that's why it was made - but I don't really want to see it because I'm not invested in the characters. Iirc I *liked* the first Avatar, and recommended it to folks, but I've never wanted to see it again because I didn't get anything out of it *besides* the spectacle.

Neando's "Commando" example is interesting, because what is "Aliens" if not "Commando" with more compelling plot and characters? Makes a difference!

"novelty wears off" is otm for me. yeah imho even with avatar 1, even by 2009 i had already been shown so goddamn many "visually spectacular" CGI alien planets and elaborate landscapes and fantasy beasties that it just didnt make me ooh and aah like it was supposed to. its cool for a bit but after an hour or so "look at what else we animated" stops being enough to hang the whole experience on. if that makes me a joyless nerd who needs to have their brain stroked by retrograde "elements of theater" (rmde) so be it.

also the racial stuff is gross as hell, props to those who can at least admit it, nobody should be fooling themselves w that shit

Iirc I *liked* the first Avatar, and recommended it to folks, but I've never wanted to see it again because I didn't get anything out of it *besides* the spectacle.

yeah i felt the same way about the first avatar, but i kinda want to just get on this ride again lol

after an hour or so "look at what else we animated" stops being enough to hang the whole experience on

This is what drives me nuts when, for example, Twitter accounts dedicated to "amazing shots" will post a still frame from some fucking Marvel thing that is 100% computer-generated. It's not a "shot" of anything — it's a digital painting. Which is fine! But don't pretend you filmed something.

the racial stuff is gross as hell

Slate has a good piece on that topic today.

when you're making these movies you have to figure out what the "camera" is doing even if that camera is just the way the frame moves. so... you're wrong

i'm willing to spend two hours watching mr. cameron's magicquarium if in the third hour i can see one of film's great set piece choreographers indulge in some of the most visceral and elaborately-staged (and surprisingly violent!) action i've seen in years

i mean, fair cop that a still frame from a marvel movie is totally empty garbage xp

when you're making these movies you have to figure out what the "camera" is doing even if that camera is just the way the frame moves. so... you're wrong

Words mean things, Brad. If a new word for what Cameron (or some Marvel hack) is doing is required, great — come up with one. But *shooting a scene* is one thing, and *creating a digital cartoon* is another. They are two different ways of approaching the same art form (cinema). I'm not saying that one is better or worse than the other. But to deny that they're two fundamentally different things is just foot-stomping.

i certainly get off on my share of brainless visual spectacles, but as i get older i find i'm more & more interested in visual spectacles that involve the human body. the way ppl are talking about enjoying the new avatar isnt foreign to me, its 100% how i enjoy martial arts & car chase/stunt movies these days, but i guess my bias is that theres something in my brain that is way more activated by the spectacle of human bodies in motion on planet earth and less & less blown away by planets where the sky is green or w/e.

the way ppl are talking about enjoying the new avatar isnt foreign to me, its 100% how i enjoy martial arts & car chase/stunt movies these days, but i guess my bias is that theres something in my brain that is way more activated by the spectacle of human bodies in motion on planet earth and less & less blown away by planets where the sky is green or w/e.

Me too — just keeping it to car stuff, I would much rather watch a movie like Lost Bullet where all the stunts are done by real human beings in real cars than one of the Fast & Furious movies where cars are leaping from one skyscraper to another or floating in space.

i'm willing to spend two hours watching mr. cameron's magicquarium if in the third hour i can see one of film's great set piece choreographers indulge in some of the most visceral and elaborately-staged (and surprisingly violent!) action i've seen in years

Yeah that's the other thing the movie has going for it which doesn't get mentioned enough — dude is one of the great action directors, and I for one did not get tired of the closing 40 minutes of mayhem because the action kept moving and changing.

Also, I don't pretend to understand everything that goes on in making such a CGI-dependent movie, but it's not only a cartoon, there are actual actors (in motion-capture suits, granted) actually moving, there are actual sets and actual cameras moving through them.

i do think there's a fundamental difference between mo-cap and pure cgi, and, to me, that difference comes across very starkly when comparing the action in this film to *insert marvel film here*

Yeah, the action feels much more visceral here.

Definitely some rad action stuff in the final third, but thought the final throwdown with the big bad was a little anticlimactic.

I agree but that's partly because he got away. And also because Sully himself had to be rescued by his kids, solidifying the movie as really being more their story than his.

the movie is all-digital sure, but that doesn't mean that cameron didn't use a boatload of practical effects. this is the guy who basically built an artificial lake for titanic, and he's back on his water bullshit again

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/16/movies/avatar-2-fx-cgi.html

it's hard not to be impressed with the scope of filmmaking ingenuity required to make this movie look as good as it does.

see also, this indiewire interview: https://www.indiewire.com/2022/12/avatar-3-james-cameron-interview-1234793007/

I haven't seen JC's last three movies. I'm watching them on a 30 year delay, looking forward to finally seeing Titanic in 2027.

When I think about James Cameron's movies, the first thing that comes to mind is honestly the characters, with the effects and action second (Even though the effects in action are usually pretty awesome). I don't remember anything about True Lies, maybe my least favorite movie from him, but I remember all the characters pretty vividly. Avatar might be the sole example of the opposite for me among his films, in that I remember the look of the movie pretty well, but nothing about the characters.

just rewatched ikiru, it’s still dope, the solemn piety, the measured pacing, the sudden lurch from present to future (past to present?), the disintegration of the funeral in the last thirty minutes where you feel the impact of death in the truest human way

people who don’t like it are nerds

how were the fx?

i’m sure you could devote this energy to a new tv show forks

the fx in ikiru are just fine and match the needs of the narrative well, which is a difficult thing to do! you wouldn't think so but juggling a meaningful story with memorable characters that touches on complex topics, presented thoughtfully and without facile metaphor is somehow harder to pull off than crafting an entire world in a computer.

i'm pretty good at devoting my energy across an array of topics and media, mostly because i manage a pretty consistent intuition as to where i'll emerge feeling that it was wasted.

i think it's part of cameron's point with these movies tho, that if you build a compelling enough sandbox and hit the right story beats, you don't need that stuff. it's pure cinema, removing any vestigial elements of the stage

― comedy khadafi (voodoo chili), Wednesday, December 21, 2022

I mean, there are plenty of guns planted in the first two acts to pay off in the third... but this is it right here. the last hour

that every beat in this movie is entirely predictable, down to gosh that's a long way to swim and we haven't seen the our whale buddy in a while I bet... is a feature not a bug. it's the cinematic equivalent of Larry Bird telling his defender exactly what he's about to do and then doing it.

whoops "the last hour" snuck in there as non sequitur. was just going to say it's up there with mad max: fury road as pure cinema. the efficiency with which Cameron ensures that we are fully on board with every last random henchperson getting what they have coming is extraordinary.

yeah it's not a complex story, but it's exceedingly well-executed

the complexity comes through the visuals and the imagination of another world, its people, and culture. that's the part that doesn't always resonate with me (all the spiritual stuff about the living world is woo woo nonsense), but the story is structured well enough that i do care about the world and the characters, even if i don't always remember names

hmmm y'all want me to watch this, doncha

cameron's work has always bounced off me; am i right in assuming this is a refinement of his process and not an overhaul?

dontcha wish your Avatar was blue like me

it's the cinematic equivalent of Larry Bird telling his defender exactly what he's about to do and then doing it.

that would be exactly right, if the entire audience were all furiously hoping to stop James Cameron from doing it

he didn't start the fire

don't ask me why

Rewatched the first Avatar with the kids to prep for seeing the sequel in the theaters. We’ve been working our way through the Marvel movies and I was struck by how good JC is at overall pacing and how well directed the action sequences are. No matter how chaotic things are, you always know where to look and it’s always very clear what is happening.

Brad is probably the only person who could make me be interested in Avatar: The Way of Water (2022) but I don't think it's gonna work

my reaction to the trailer was basically shock that over a decade of work he hadn't come up with anything

like if you make an animated movie and your characters aren't conveying anything about themselves through costume, silhouette, or movement, and in fact are scarcely to be distinguished from each other except by whether or not they have mechs(?), why did you make an animated movie

Brad labeling everyone who doesn't agree with him about the movie as just 'nerds who are trying to look smart' is... an unfortunate approach. But we'll all get over it, I'm sure.

silbs this is a deeply expressive movie on every level

didn’t you love alita? the same earnestness bleeds from this, on top of which the climax is like five cameron movies in a head-on collision, haven’t felt that since the matrix reloaded

the highway sequence specifically which i think even matrix sequels haters will acknowledge as cool and also heavily indebted to cameron, it was that kind of constant raising of stakes and complexity even though you were witnessing everything with total clarity

also whales are cool and there are so many whales in this movie

Brad labeling everyone who doesn't agree with him about the movie as just 'nerds who are trying to look smart' is... an unfortunate approach. But we'll all get over it, I'm sure.

― more difficult than I look (Aimless)

Aimless, you've been on this board too goddamn long not to understand how internet hyperbole works.