I keep seeing posts on different websites (including IMDB) and hear people wondering, why so many people do not like thi
-
Etxpeme — 9 years ago(June 06, 2016 09:04 PM)
I understand perfectly your point and I respect it. However, I feel compelled to explain why I just loved Avatar:
When I first watched Avatar I was 13 years old, I hadn't seen Dances with Wolves nor The last Samurai nor any of the other films you have mentioned. Now that I have watched them, and many more and have some cinema knoledge, I can agree the story is very predictable and unoriginal. But at the time, I didn't realize it, and I'm sure there are many others like me.
About the CGI, you replied to another comment saying it prevented you from immersing yourself in the movie and another poster said you were prejudiced against it. I feel like LukeLovesFilm28 is right. I just lost myself in the film's universe, I wanted to be there, I wanted to run, jump, swim, fly, ride I wanted to be in contact with that pristine uncorrupted connected nature. And I believed every single ''CGI lie'' they told me. I wasn't thinking about a green screen and I don't think any viewer should. What would be the point of CGI, then?
About the one dimensional characters I don't think it's necessarily bad. It's simple and understandable, and it doesn't screw with your head. Take
The Deer Hunter
for example. Yes, characters are full of nuances and are very realistic. But when the movie is over you're left confused because, being so realistic characters, they're completely irrational and their decisions and actions make no sense unless you're in their head. And you have lots of doubts no one will ever be able to give a definite answer to because every viewer has its own interpretation of it. And I don't like the feeling of having lots of questions and no real answers, just hypothetical interpretations. Of course, it may be just me who doesn't understand irrational multidimensional characters, (I might even have some Asperger's, who knows?). And I can understand how someone can like having lots of questions they can try to answer themselves. But it's not the kind of thing I like. So, in that aspect, even though I agree Avatar doesn't make a great film, I can accept it.
Probably, if I hadn't watched Avatar when I was a kid with no ''cinema knowledge'' whatsoever and I watched it today that I'm more experienced and know many great films to compare it too, I wouldn't like it. Maybe I would even despise it. But, I don't know, it just has a certain magic to it that is refreshing and optimistic and I can't bring myself to watch it as the lame blockbuster many say it is (I have a weakness for the genre after all).
However, I will try again to watch it in the most objective way I can (though with some VR glasses) and update the comment if I change my mind.
Anyways, just my humble opinion, which I couldn't help but share.
-
ibrarules — 9 years ago(June 07, 2016 03:21 AM)
When I first watched Avatar I was 13 years old, I hadn't seen Dances with Wolves nor The last Samurai nor any of the other films you have mentioned. Now that I have watched them, and many more and have some cinema knoledge, I can agree the story is very predictable and unoriginal.
What I personally find a bit funny here on imdb is that many of the posters who complain at Avatar for being unoriginal truly believe that DWW/TLS/Pocahontas etc were original when they are every bit as derivative as Avatar.
It's like the posters believe that the Go Native/Monomyth started in the 90s just because they themselves grew up with movies from that decade and therefore first experienced this type of story in those movies.
To me it's all about execution and adding slight variations/twists and creating interesting visuals/characters/movie magic etc since this type of story has been around for eons. Whether DWW or Avatar succeeded with this is more interesting to discuss than them being original or not. Goes for movies about mobsters, or romcoms, or any other genre too. Just my two cents. -
tlm557 — 9 years ago(June 09, 2016 10:33 PM)
Because the story is almost identical to at least a dozen other movies with the same idea just change the race or alien or tribe or people, change the item being stolen, and change the locations. It is all the same as so many that have been done before. Just add some modern CGI to draw some ridiculous looking aliens that's the only difference.
-
-
jacut01 — 9 years ago(August 22, 2016 11:09 PM)
Why do most "educated moviegoers" dislike this film. Well, the script is beep the characters are laughable, the dialogues are ridiculous, the direction is awful and most actors are bad. Even great special effects cannot save it from being the most overrated movie in cinema history (initially at least, now most viewers have come to their senses and see it for what it is, something ranging from a stinking piece of garbage to a somewhat average piece of entertainment).
-
sommdude — 9 years ago(August 22, 2016 11:54 PM)
curious to know what you think makes someone an "educated moviegoer"
- someone who has seen a lot of movies
- someone who has advanced (college) education
- someone educated in the cinematic arts
I'm a Gunslinger. I deal in hard calibers.
-
leybell — 9 years ago(September 11, 2016 07:22 PM)
I just finished Avatar tonight. I only put it in my queue 'cause of the new land in Disney's Animal Kingdom (opening 2017? '18?). I see why people like AVatar or hate it. Since I just mentioned an amusement park, I think it will be the basis of my argument.
I am not a youngster anymore, but I remember defining experiences and things in my environment by the system: hate that, love this. Love that, Like this, hate this. I don't remember what my motive was. influence? Most people learn either by the parents or by the rude stares of peers NOT to say, "How can you eat that crap?" or "Uh, mustard is so nasty" WE and you understand individual preferences. Apparently so does James Cameron. He chose not to thrill one group in order that he amuse another less discerning group. Disney did it. chefs do it. People who create coasters do it. Some people love predictable turn, others want a surprise. Cameron's focus was not layered, complex characters. Failure is aiming for something and uh, failing to achieve it. I don't think he aimed for that at all. and let's not forget that even J. Cameron didn't finance the movie all himself (or did he? how rich is he?) You know the producers and investors are going to demand a likeable hero, an almost happy ending, and a plot simple enough so they can dub it into 20 languages. -
LukeLovesFilm28 — 9 years ago(September 15, 2016 03:17 PM)
Looking at Sarah Connor, Cameron knows exactly how to make great, layered, complex characters. He didn't put a Sarah Connor in Avatar because it would take away from the overall experience, you idiot. And the overall experience is supposed to be like watching The Wizard of Oz. NOT Taxi Driver.
Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.