-= Gametoast.com =-

Darth_Squoobus wrote:They had a monstrous budget, and the movie sucked. District 9 had a tiny budget and it was great. What does that tell you?

Ya District 9 was good. The aliens in that movie were much more alien then the Nav'i.

It seems that for the last page, people have been hating on the movie. Does nobody watch movies simply to be entertained nowadays? Or did you all go to see the film with the mindset of criticising the #1 movie at the time?

It was a fun film to watch, and I really enjoyed it for what it was, a simple story, good visuals, and overall highly entertaining. Being smart on the Internet is great and all, but did everyone leave the theatre nitpicking about what they posted here?

Grev wrote:It seems that for the last page, people have been hating on the movie. Does nobody watch movies simply to be entertained nowadays? Or did you all go to see the film with the mindset of criticising the #1 movie at the time?

Um, every post I've seen has said that it's at least decent... unoriginal, yes, and with arguably annoying themes, yes, but bad? No.

Grev wrote:Does nobody watch movies simply to be entertained nowadays?

I tend to see it that no movies are made to be only entertaining nowadays: There always has to be some sort of message in the movie. Now, that's definately not a bad thing, but in movies like Avatar, they put the message at more importance than the plot, which kills the entertainment value for me.

plasmoidmonkey wrote:

Grev wrote:Does nobody watch movies simply to be entertained nowadays?

I tend to see it that no movies are made to be only entertaining nowadays: There always has to be some sort of message in the movie. Now, that's definately not a bad thing, but in movies like Avatar, they put the message at more importance than the plot, which kills the entertainment value for me.

I agree with what your saying completely. Though I'm not really sure the plot overall is the problem, but the sheer basis for the plot was completely unoriginal, though I have to say, they made the best of it and I was wowed enough by the effects that I left the theater pretty satisfied. However, this movie's plot was really the weak point, and if you can't stand all the environmentalist mumbo jumbo or the portrayal of the Na'vi, than I can completely understand not liking this movie. It's a matter of what sorts of things you like and what sorts of things you get out of movies in the first place...i.e. it's simply a matter of opinion.

Saw it a couple days ago, enjoyed it. Godly CGI (coming from a person with bad vision, that means something), bland story, explosions FTW! Unfortunately 3D does nothing for me lacking a second angle of view, so .

Grev wrote:It seems that for the last page, people have been hating on the movie. Does nobody watch movies simply to be entertained nowadays? Or did you all go to see the film with the mindset of criticising the #1 movie at the time?

I enjoyed the movie but I have a feeling I would not have liked it if the effects were not what they were.

I saw the movie some days ago in 3D and it was totally awesome. The story, the grapic, the sounds and the message are all great and very well combined.
Of course it´s inspired by the fight of Indians and the first Americans but that´s nothing bad.
The movie is not about pure action, no, it wants you to think about our world: We are destroying our planet (like the humans in the movie wanted to destroy Pandora) with war, with pollution and just for resources. We should save the nature, because we can not exist without it, be peaceful and think about ways how we can live on earth without destroying it. The movie also wants to tell us, that we don´t need armys and high-tech weapons, because war only leads to destruction.
I think that the movie-makers are all right about that, and I can´t understand those of you who are "annoyed by the nature/hippie message". Maybe you should think about it once more.

This film is "100%" good.

Bantha55 wrote:I saw the movie some days ago in 3D and it was totally awesome. The story, the grapic, the sounds and the message are all great and very well combined.
Of course it´s inspired by the fight of Indians and the first Americans but that´s nothing bad.
The movie is not about pure action, no, it wants you to think about our world: We are destroying our planet (like the humans in the movie wanted to destroy Pandora) with war, with pollution and just for resources. We should save the nature, because we can not exist without it, be peaceful and think about ways how we can live on earth without destroying it. The movie also wants to tell us, that we don´t need armys and high-tech weapons, because war only leads to destruction.
I think that the movie-makers are all right about that, and I can´t understand those of you who are "annoyed by the nature/hippie message". Maybe you should think about it once more.

This film is "100%" good.

...Now I've seen everything... I thought we only had one hippie here *Hi Dann!*

Puh-LEEZE don't get me started on everything you just said here, because I'll get banned for my responses. I agree that graphics and sound are great, but story and message are horrible...

GangsterJawa wrote:

Bantha55 wrote:I saw the movie some days ago in 3D and it was totally awesome. The story, the grapic, the sounds and the message are all great and very well combined.
Of course it´s inspired by the fight of Indians and the first Americans but that´s nothing bad.
The movie is not about pure action, no, it wants you to think about our world: We are destroying our planet (like the humans in the movie wanted to destroy Pandora) with war, with pollution and just for resources. We should save the nature, because we can not exist without it, be peaceful and think about ways how we can live on earth without destroying it. The movie also wants to tell us, that we don´t need armys and high-tech weapons, because war only leads to destruction.
I think that the movie-makers are all right about that, and I can´t understand those of you who are "annoyed by the nature/hippie message". Maybe you should think about it once more.

This film is "100%" good.

...Now I've seen everything... I thought we only had one hippie here *Hi Dann!*

Puh-LEEZE don't get me started on everything you just said here, because I'll get banned for my responses. I agree that graphics and sound are great, but story and message are horrible...

The message is horrible? Are you saying the British colonization of North America, or Spanish colonization of South/Central America was justified? Seriously? The message is BAD?

GangsterJawa wrote: ...Now I've seen everything... I thought we only had one hippie here *Hi Dann!*

Puh-LEEZE don't get me started on everything you just said here, because I'll get banned for my responses. I agree that graphics and sound are great, but story and message are horrible...

but back on topic

Le sigh. I'd like to add that I am annoyed by critics these days. Just saying.

Just because someone says a movie is bad for them, everyone else is influenced by them that it is bad, despite them seeing it or not, which is really dumb....in my opinion. This is why I go by what I like and not reviewers who have nothing better to do than nitpick little things from a..... what's the word? Movie. It's a movie. I just wish someone could go on to say, "I don't like the movie" or... "I like the movie." and move on. I dunno, it's just stuff like that which annoys me. This goes for Star Trek, Transformers 2....any movie recently that has stunning visuals. Usually I see critics who only pay attention to the visuals....and say that's the ONLY thing about the movie, when really there was a bigger picture.

I am not assuming anyone here is like that, I am merely throwing out a rant that I needed to get off my chest.

Anyways, I haven't had the chance to see this yet. Since my family and I are not the critical type, we would either like it or not, and move on with our lives.

If any of my wording offends, let me know. I'm just sharing an honest opinion.

DarthD.U.C.K. wrote:

GangsterJawa wrote: ...Now I've seen everything... I thought we only had one hippie here *Hi Dann!*

Puh-LEEZE don't get me started on everything you just said here, because I'll get banned for my responses. I agree that graphics and sound are great, but story and message are horrible...

Hidden/Spoiler:

always wanted to use that one day

but back on topic

You my friend, WIN.

Yeah RSL, I have to agree. That's why if I like how a movie looks, I watch it. I don't even bother reading reviews. For all we know, the reviewer may have been having a bad day, anything.

Grev wrote:

GangsterJawa wrote:

Bantha55 wrote:I saw the movie some days ago in 3D and it was totally awesome. The story, the grapic, the sounds and the message are all great and very well combined.
Of course it´s inspired by the fight of Indians and the first Americans but that´s nothing bad.
The movie is not about pure action, no, it wants you to think about our world: We are destroying our planet (like the humans in the movie wanted to destroy Pandora) with war, with pollution and just for resources. We should save the nature, because we can not exist without it, be peaceful and think about ways how we can live on earth without destroying it. The movie also wants to tell us, that we don´t need armys and high-tech weapons, because war only leads to destruction.
I think that the movie-makers are all right about that, and I can´t understand those of you who are "annoyed by the nature/hippie message". Maybe you should think about it once more.

This film is "100%" good.

...Now I've seen everything... I thought we only had one hippie here *Hi Dann!*

Puh-LEEZE don't get me started on everything you just said here, because I'll get banned for my responses. I agree that graphics and sound are great, but story and message are horrible...

The message is horrible? Are you saying the British colonization of North America, or Spanish colonization of South/Central America was justified? Seriously? The message is BAD?

Maybe I should back up and rephrase a little bit. As a whole, I liked the movie. I liked the CGI, sound, characters, locations, vehicles, music, etc etc. The only reason I said in my above message that the story is horrible is because it's very little more than a clone of Dances With Wolves. The message is my problem. No, not the invasion message, my issue is with the Mother Earth, commune with nature, save the planet, "Eywa" stuff. I agree, colonization of North America, attacking Indians, that was COMPLETELY unjustified, and I have no problem with that part of it. It's the "Planet is God" that I have a problem with.


...Ouch, I think I got owned by a duck...

GangsterJawa wrote:my issue is with the Mother Earth, commune with nature, save the planet, "Eywa" stuff. I agree, colonization of North America, attacking Indians, that was COMPLETELY unjustified, and I have no problem with that part of it. It's the "Planet is God" that I have a problem with.

In my opinion, you missed the message of the movie. The natives worshiped the planet (and they thought it was a god) but it was never made out to be - objectively - a god. The best description given was when Sigourney Weaver explained that it was basically an overmind/planet-mind and that everything living on the planet was interconnected by the planet they lived on. It was saying in not so few words "you depend on the planet and the planet depends on you."

Bantha55 wrote:I can´t understand those of you who are "annoyed by the nature/hippie message". Maybe you should think about it once more.

I don't think the issue is people being annoyed by the message so much as it is people not wanting to be beat over the head with it. The center-end section of the movie was pretty heavy-handed with its message, and whenever a story goes to such great lengths to force a message down your throat it:
a) Distracts from the story as a whole, and
b) Detracts from the impact of the message

QFT @ Mav.

I love how every time a movie features a civilization that isn't based around technology like ours is, it's instantly labeled a "HIPPIE MOVE!!!!!!". Apparently everyone was a hippie before the Industrial Revolution.

Of course it´s inspired by the fight of Indians and the first Americans but that´s nothing bad.

You're right. There's never, ever, ever, EVER been another work of fiction that's had a civilization/faction/whatever with a much higher understanding of technology attack another with little/no understanding/care for technology for their resources. Heck, that's what War Of The Worlds was. And Independence Day. The Combine from Half-Life 2? Sorry, got distracted. Anyways, you're right, it must be based on that. It's not like there are any other times in human history when that's happened..

And on that note, not everything that appears on a screen is based on a historical event. A lotta things are just made up by people.

The movie is not about pure action, no, it wants you to think about our world: We are destroying our planet (like the humans in the movie wanted to destroy Pandora) with war, with pollution and just for resources.

Makes sense to me. In an alternate timeline, when the military-esque corporation won, Pandora becomes a desert wasteland, deprived of all resources.[/sarcasticBorderlandsreference] True, it's not about pure action, it's about all the CG effects. Not just the action. Plus, they weren't destroying their planet at all. Aliens from another planet were. Independence Day...

We should save the nature, because we can not exist without it, be peaceful and think about ways how we can live on earth without destroying it. The movie also wants to tell us, that we don´t need armys and high-tech weapons, because war only leads to destruction.

So many things that are just not quite correct about that. While I agree that preserving nature is a great thing to do, and pollution does suck, discarding all weapons wouldn't make much difference. We'd just go back to the good ol' days of impaling each other on sharp sticks and slowly make our way back up to functional cannons. Similarly, asking people to stop using the technology we have and go back to everything natural would be asking them to be content with what's being provided to them, which really goes against human nature.

It seems people have forgotten that, however you believe the Earth started, we started with only nature. We've made our way to modern technology because of our want to make things easier and/or better. Take everything away, and we'd just make our way back here.

I think that the movie-makers are all right about that, and I can´t understand those of you who are "annoyed by the nature/hippie message". Maybe you should think about it once more.

And I think you took this movie waaay too seriously... If anything, I would've gotten the message "Big Corporations Are Bad!" or something like that. Of course, I'd have to take it seriously at all before that happened. Anyways, I don't think there is a message, it's just a movie that was made to be enjoyable. Yes, movies ARE made for that reason. Weird, right? But again, if there is a message, I don't care. I really don't. I don't take life lessons from Hollywood.

Raptor522 wrote:

Of course it´s inspired by the fight of Indians and the first Americans but that´s nothing bad.

You're right. There's never, ever, ever, EVER been another work of fiction that's had a civilization/faction/whatever with a much higher understanding of technology attack another with little/no understanding/care for technology for their resources. Heck, that's what War Of The Worlds was. And Independence Day. The Combine from Half-Life 2? Sorry, got distracted. Anyways, you're right, it must be based on that. It's not like there are any other times in human history when that's happened..

It is more than a little naive to ignore any parallels between Native American subjugation and this movie. The other movies you list have little to no similarity. In this movie they are literally called "savages" and there are constant references to trinkets/cheap public works being offered to them for cooperation.

And while there may have been other instances like this is history, our country's history with Native Americans is the most well-known and likeliest reference being made here. Strawmanning his argument into "There's never, ever, ever, EVER been another work of fiction... etc." is a cheap tactic, especially in light of the fact that he's probably right.

Why are you guys so surprised by the overbearing messageo f this film? James Cameron's earlier works, such as Terminator 1 & 2, were technophobic, and ALIENS, was, well... harder to explain. The colonial marines, or "grunts" were portrayed as being unable to do something as simple as slaughter chitinous aliens barely smarter than chimpanzees. Not only that, but they were also made to be xenophobic (because they referred to skirmishes with extraterrestrials as "bug hunts"). Avatar takes this a step further by making them all-out fascists.

"Like you could do any better!", I hear you say. Well, here's how I'd have it:

Yeah, you're right, Mav. Sorry, I was still in Rant Mode from something else. There definitely are similarities, but it's not similar enough to convince me it's based on that. The humans were on Pandora to mine the unobtanium they discovered there, not because they wanted a new place to colonize. They didn't start destroying the planet & killing the Na'vi simply for the sake of it. They took down the Hometree because it was over the largest deposit of unobtanium, not because they saw the Na'vi as a threat or just wanted that particular place to be flat. They destroy the Tree Of Voices and attempt to destroy the Tree Of Souls because they knew it would demoralize the Na'vi too much for them to resist anymore, so that they wouldn't have to keep killing 'em. They killed Na'vi in quasi-self-defense, not because they set out for genocide. (I say "quasi-self-defense" because it's in a "whoever-gets-in-their-way" kinda way). On a more overall note, the Na'vi win and the humans leave, leaving them to get back to how things were. The two sides and some of the details, such as calling the Na'vi "savages" may be similar, but other than that, I'm not seeing much.

This post was assisted by Wikipedia, because I couldn't remember the names of anything to save my life.

@ Darth: Word.

That's another more-or-less relevant thing that bugs me about movies nowadays: they always end up as love stories. Not always a bad thing, but in this case, it's a little odd..

Raptor522 wrote:The humans were on Pandora to mine the unobtanium they discovered there, not because they wanted a new place to colonize.

Irrelevant. It's resource acquisition thing no matter how you slice it.

Raptor522 wrote:They didn't start destroying the planet & killing the Na'vi simply for the sake of it...They killed Na'vi in quasi-self-defense, not because they set out for genocide

You have a strange understanding of U.S. history if you think we killed or relocated Native Americans "for the sake of it" or "for genocide." We relocated them/fought them because we wanted their land for our selves. See:

Raptor522 wrote:They took down the Hometree because it was over the largest deposit of unobtanium

Furthermore, read up on your American history. The movie literally depicted a Trail of Tears when they were forced out of their home.

The story is simple. More-powerful group wants what less-powerful group has on their own land. More powerful group forces less-powerful group to leave their homes. The parallels are undeniable - the whole impetus for the main character's story was about forcing relocation!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_removal

Thematic elements are similar as well, like the tribalism of the Na'vi, the level of technology (bows, arrows, etc.), strong women leaders, spiritual connection with the land - but if the overt story elements don't smack you in the face then it is doubtful these will either.