While I as an adult agree with your jaded opinion to a degree, I will still go and watch it with my seven year old son. We’ll bot “oooh” and “aaah” over the 3D effects, I’ll overlook the tired plot device and he will appreciate it as he hasn’t had the kind of exposure to it that us grown-ups have.
And furthermore…why do we as a people keep repeating the mistakes of history in spite of the fact that we claim to know the lesson already?
James Cameron entertained me more than anyone else in the 80s, So I’m hoping the movie does well. He has a schmaltzy side-- see the end of The Abyss–but there’s no one who can direct action better, or tell stories of tough competent guys (and ladies) with big machines in extreme situations.
I know the story will be silly noble savage stuff, but the combat scenes should be dramatic and exciting. I think it’ll be a little similar to Titanic, With a fast moving story layered on top of a pretty sappy theme.
I’ve been reading a few reviews and the “precious mineral” that the evil marines are trying to get from the Na’vi is called Unobtanium. Seriously.
Christ. This movie is going to be pretty, but it’s going to be a chore to watch. I can feel it.
Actually, that seems to indicate a certain level of self-awareness that I find kind of appealing.
All of these remarks about the film’s potential “cheesiness” have convinced me: Cameron is trying to make his very own Star Wars. Just as Lucas in 1977 fused Flash Gordon, Kurosawa, Westerns, WW2 movies and the Lensman novels into something transcendent, Cameron is aiming for the same result by mixing pieces of Vietnam movies, Heavy Metal comics, anime and God knows what else. There’s no assurance he’ll succeed - but there’s nothing wrong with trying.
I wonder…
Will the fact that it’s the Christmas season soften the impact of “sappiness” that may be in this movie? (Since, I presume, folks are expecting to go see more “family oriented” stuff this time of year.)
In other words, will the fans be more forgiving than they would be during the summer “blockbuster” time?
Yeah, what a completely ridiculous term that nobody has ever used before.
[Foghorn Leghorn]I say, it’s a joke, son[/FL]
That’s my point. Using the parody term for the object, in a serious movie, just sounds terrible. It would be like Robert Downey Jr running around as Sherlock Holmes while looking for the red herring.
But what if the characters know it’s a parody term - if the object was named that way on purpose? Would that be OK?
You know, it’s funny. Nearly every complaint about Avatar I’ve read on this board pretty much sums up all my criticisms of Star Wars and George Lucas. Tedious, unoriginal, stupid plot that really exists just to showcase the special effects (and no, I’m not talking about the prequels. That’s exactly how the original trilogy is, too). Yet, somehow, it’s a well-loved, even classic, film. Every time there’s a new ridiculous movie like 2012 and Transformers 2, lots of people post that they have every intention of seeing it and they don’t care how stupid it’ll undoubtedly be because it’s “fun” and “mindless entertainment” and whatnot.
Yet, this film is completely polarizing, prompting people to post everything from mild nitpicks (come on, “unobtainium” has been in use for over 50 years and not just as Sci-Fi parody. On top of that, it’s not a sin for a movie to be self-aware or for the characters to make meta references. If you don’t like that, there’s a whole shitload of movies and television you’ll have to avoid), to completely insane reviews (yes the politics of Barak Obama, Che Quevara, and Ho Chi Minh are all exactly the same, and said politics can be summed up by a film maker in a 2 hour movie without losing any of the subtly or nuance that such a widespread political ideology must surely have) and I would bet dollars to donuts that some of the largest detractors will happily jump all over my shit for criticizing Star Wars (a film I have actually seen, unlike everybody in this thread talking about Avatar) and not even see the humor in their reaction.
I’m seeing it Sunday, at the only *true *IMAX theater in Manhattan, the Lincoln Center 13. Don’t be fooled by theaters claiming to be IMAX, in most cases they are only slightly larger than regular screens. The Lincoln Square IMAX is 76x97’ while the “IMAX” at the Empire 25 is 28x58’. I was very impressed by the 15 min preview so I am hoping it will be worth it.
The showings at that theater are all sold out so I wonder how early I have to get there to get a good seat…
I can’t understand why there are adults who cannot empathize with a character because they are blue and CGI.
Aside from the fact that it isn’t true of either the prequel or original Star Wars films, and the fact that the director is pissed-pants-pleased with himself for making such a “subversive” political movie (leaving aside the fact that his politics are typical Hollywood idiocy), and the fact that the revealed, stated plot is basically mindless idiocy…
Why shouldn’t we complain? I don’t like being spoonfed trip by people who proclaim their greatness with half-billion-dollar crap? I’m increasingly pissed at Hollywood’s total incompetence and ruination of potentially grand movies.
LOL, I told you that in the other thread. But, that’s part of what’s awesome about it. 
Rather than make up some hokey explanation for their floating mineral, he just sticks with the trope. I’m perfectly ok with that. It’s the ultimate key to knowing what I am watching.
LOL, only because you’re taking it too seriously. Not every Sci Fi needs to be 2001. But then again, how can anyone watch a movie about black stone squares floating in space?
Just think about it, you can sit there for every delicious minute of that three hour movie, feeling better than James Cameron. 
That’s where I’m seeing it on Friday Morning.
Lol lol lol get waste 420 watch avatar lol
Pssst, your teabags are showing, might want to tuck 'em back in.
Well, it is true that all six Star Wars film have extremely tedious, ridiculous plots that were already well-worn and ridiculous in the 70s. And I haven’t seen anything in the trailers that indicate Cameron is “pissed-pants-pleased” with himself, though I am fascinated by the rather bizarre implication that art should be apolitical (and of course, you know exactly what the politics are even though you’ve never seen the film because other people who haven’t seen the film–and one crackpot who has–tells you what they are).
As for the plot being mindless idiocy, once again see Wars: Star. Also, there are no new plots in Hollywood (or literature for that matter). Shakespeare made an entire career out of recycling tired plots. It’s not a crime and it’s not anything new. You might be tired of this particular plotline, and that’s fine. Nobody says you have to like it. But don’t act like Cameron in particular, or Hollywood in general, has wronged you in some way because the plot of a movie isn’t 100% original. If that’s really your baseline requirement, you must not get your entertainment from movies, television shows, theater, books, or music.
I’m trying to imagine a way I can make that happen for my screening.
“Avatar will change everything.”
No, actually, it’s more of the same. Maybe a tad bit better in the special effects/3D department. Or, to quote a reviewer at CHUD.com in their review of Avatar…
I want to like Avatar, but nothing I’ve read about it tells me I should spend $9.50 on it.
Perhaps we should wait until we see the movie before we start championing other reviewers’ stances as our own? I could cherry-pick snippets from reviews too that offer the exact opposite opinion; that doesn’t make its contents any more or less valid.
And that’s putting aside the fact that only time will verify who was right…
