Avatar 2, 3 and 4 or how James Cameron stopped worrying and pulled The Hobbit on us

[publicist 4,636]

12 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Unpopular opinion: I think Endgame is a better movie and more deserving of the "biggest box office of all time" crown than Avatar.

 

Yeah, but you need to a dummy grade in Marvel lore to understand it. It's totally confusing for anyone not watching this shit all the time and so i say bollocks to both (for different reasons).

[blondheim 1,031]

I think the word he was looking for was culminant. Fulminant is a word but I wouldn’t use it in reference to the 22nd film in an ongoing series.

[GerateWohl 2,822]

3 minutes ago, blondheim said:

I think the word he was looking for was culminant. Fulminant is a word but I wouldn’t use it in reference to the 22nd film in an ongoing series.

 No.

 

But now I just learned a new word: culminant

[blondheim 1,031]

11 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

 No.

 

But now I just learned a new word: culminant

Please tell me how fulminant refers to Endgame.

[GerateWohl 2,822]

23 minutes ago, blondheim said:

Please tell me how fulminant refers to Endgame.

I just compared the synonyms to it in english and german and found that the meaning and the way it is used in the two languages might be slightly different. But still I stick to it.

 

And I have to agree with Publicist. Endgame does not work very well, if you haven't inhalated the other movies. But if you have, then this is really a fulminant finale to the series. 

[blondheim 1,031]

It’s really only fulminant if you haven’t “inhalated” the others.

[Edmilson 4,925]

5 hours ago, GerateWohl said:

And yes. They should have stopped there. 

Given how overall disappointing Phase 4 has been until now, I totally agree.

[Naïve Old Fart 7,933]

3 hours ago, blondheim said:

I think the word he was looking for was culminant.

I learned another new word, today: culminant.

[Not Mr. Big 4,210]

18 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Unpopular opinion: I think Endgame is a better movie and more deserving of the "biggest box office of all time" crown than Avatar.

Endgame is easily the best MCU movie but even then, it's still little more than a testament to corporate synergy and basic continuity.

 

I'd rather a director-driven original movie like Avatar hold the top spot. (Especially considering the stranglehold the MCU has on the industry)

[Yavar Moradi 1,788]

My problem with Avatar is how UNoriginal it is. It's all stuff I've seen elsewhere before (and done much better there). I'm a huge sci-fi fan, but I liked this story much better as Dances With Wolves, The Last Samurai, hell even Disney's Pocahontas. And those are far from perfect films!

 

Endgame on the other hand might be a franchise film, but strikes me as far more original a film than Avatar. You think it's all been done before?

 

Also, I don't agree it's the best MCU movie; I found Infinity War to be much more powerful. And how many big budget fantasy/sci-fi/superhero films have the villain as the clear protagonist, like Thanos in this? Yeah, I'm sorry... the majority of superhero films are fairly unoriginal (even great ones, like Captain America: The Winter Soldier). But to me Infinity War in particular is fairly unique.

 

I'm going to blow some minds here and reveal that, as bad/ridiculous/silly as it was at times, my wife and I were both much more engaged by the often-nonsensical Jupiter Ascending... because even though it made much less sense than Avatar, at least it felt legitimately imaginative rather than a tired and cliched retread.

 

Now Cameron has often repackaged what came before (Titanic is a great example, with a lot of story beats cribbed from earlier films on the same subject). But somehow most of his earlier films felt (and still feel) fresh to me, despite their influences. I love Aliens, the first two Terminator films (especially the second), True Lies, and yes (despite some faults) Titanic. I also really like the sci-fi TV show he created, Dark Angel.

 

But Avatar was just so... SO tired and predictable... not a single thing surprised me, excited me, delighted me, amused me, or even befuddled me. It was thoroughly mediocre and thoroughly boring.

 

Yavar

[Not Mr. Big 4,210]

4 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

My problem with Avatar is how UNoriginal it is. It's all stuff I've seen elsewhere before (and done much better there). I'm a huge sci-fi fan, but I liked this story much better as Dances With Wolves, The Last Samurai, hell even Disney's Pocahontas. And those are far from perfect films!

I never got the "Pocahontas in space" argument.  Like so many other films, Avatar takes inspiration from multiple sources and creates an original new thing.  (Star Wars and Indiana Jones were inspired by the serials of Lucas's youth, Alien was pitched as "Jaws in space").   

 

The MCU (in this case, Endgame) takes established, beloved IP characters and has them run around in bland, stakeless plots while saying "remember this?" to the audience. Their success is based purely off of brand recognition/previous franchise entries while Avatar didn't rely on any of that stuff.  

[Yavar Moradi 1,788]

All I can say is that Star Wars and Indiana Jones and Alien (and even Aliens!) all feel quite fresh, despite their many influences. And to me... Avatar doesn't. It feels like a pale copy of earlier, better films given a sci-fi skin, ridiculous budget, and a lot of marketing hype.

It certainly didn't help that the main character was entirely lacking in any charisma. But TRON: Legacy managed to overcome that somehow, and win me over with its world and a somewhat interesting story. Avatar didn't.

 

I can't fathom how you consider Infinity War or Endgame "stakeless". Yes, Endgame has a fair amount of "remember this?" because it's a time-travel story. One of the reasons I do strongly prefer Infinity War.

 

Yavar

[Not Mr. Big 4,210]

5 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

can't fathom how you consider Infinity War or Endgame "stakeless". Yes, Endgame has a fair amount of "remember this?" because it's a time-travel story. One of the reasons I do strongly prefer Infinity War.

That was more a comment on the MCU's success in general than Endgame in particular (that and Infinity War are the only MCU films to have something resembling actual stakes).

 

They feel more to me like a yearly check-up or an episode of a long-running sitcom.   Very little changes over the course of an individual movie unless it's sanctioned by Kevin Fiege (who holds a stranglehold over the directors, writers, and cinematographers)

[publicist 4,636]

It's my sincere hope that Marvel has run its course. Though it more and more looks like the institution cinema has. 

 

As for Cameron, if he were a stock i wouldn't take out my investment yet. He (and Fox) must have been clearly aware of Avatar's lack of staying power, despite initial cultural (and bo) impact. Cameron always was a tekkie and i don't think he would undertake such an enterprise if he couldn't deliver on a technical level (4D?). On the other hand, he's also old by now, so maybe he just lost it. Because i watched the trailer, and for the life of me can't imagine being captivated by that smurf world and 3D can't be the selling point a second time. 

[Naïve Old Fart 7,933]

Hell, yeah, @Yavar Moradi, but...er...no love for Cameron's true masterpiece, THE ABYSS?

[JNHFan2000 1,561]

I think one of the biggest reasons that Avatar made so much money is because of the then 3D thing that was very new. And because the film has been re-released in cinemas for the past 12 years multiple times.

 

I'll be impressed if Avatar 2 can make as much money, I'll give the film that. But nothing to me seems interesting.

[blondheim 1,031]

Well the rumor is that most of this movie is set underwater and filmed underwater, on a new moon on Pandora. Considering the trailer had like one underwater shot in it really, I don’t think we’ve seen enough of the good stuff. That’s probably on purpose. Cameron is always pushing the boundaries visually and technically and I suspect this will be no different. I just hope the story is good enough to support these visuals. I think it has the potential to be fresh and even a little scary. Underwater has a natural claustrophobia he could exploit shamelessly. Even though I was one of those people disappointed in the first movie I am still very curious to see what this underwater Cameron movie will be like. 

[GerateWohl 2,822]

1 hour ago, blondheim said:

I just hope the story is good enough to support these visuals.

I am afraid, that was exactly their approached for the screenplay. In the first movie and most likely in the second, too.

And probably like in the first film, the story should not distract from the viuals. 

So, avoid anything unfamiliar or anything that would make you think too much, so that you can just relaxed enjox the visuals. They went through that exercise in the first movie with the music. And probably the story.

And the second movie is likely not going to be different.

[Yavar Moradi 1,788]

3 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Hell, yeah, @Yavar Moradi, but...er...no love for Cameron's true masterpiece, THE ABYSS?

I must confess that I’ve never seen it!

 

Yavar

[Romão 2,157]

I found Avatar not only narratively unoriginal, but also visually unoriginal. You can literally create a totally new world and you simply create a terrestrial rain forest, populated by blue native Americans and dinosaurs. 

 

For all the praise it got, I thought the whole thing was conceptually very bland 

[mstrox 5,860]

Just goes to show that even if all one billion of us who saw the movie thought it was bland (which seems to be the case), it still will make money because we got suckered into seeing it.

[Naïve Old Fart 7,933]

2 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I must confess that I’ve never seen it!

You should, soon as.

 

 

4 hours ago, blondheim said:

...I am still very curious to see what this underwater Cameron movie will be like. 

You wanna see an underwater Cameron movie? Watch THE ABYSS.

[Edmilson 4,925]

I never saw The Abyss. Is it any good? And which version of the movie should I watch?

 

Alan Silvestri's score is great though.

[Yavar Moradi 1,788]

3 hours ago, Romão said:

I found Avatar not only narratively unoriginal, but also visually unoriginal.

 

I liked these little guys:

 

And the floating mountains were kinda cool even if they were based on anime.

 

3 hours ago, Romão said:

You can literally create a totally new world and you simply create a terrestrial rain forest, populated by blue native Americans and dinosaurs. 

 

Yup, exactly.

 

2 hours ago, mstrox said:

Just goes to show that even if all one billion of us who saw the movie thought it was bland (which seems to be the case), it still will make money because we got suckered into seeing it.

 

Yeah but I won't be suckered into seeing the next one in theater.

 

15 hours ago, Not Mr. Big said:

That was more a comment on the MCU's success in general than Endgame in particular (that and Infinity War are the only MCU films to have something resembling actual stakes).

 

They feel more to me like a yearly check-up or an episode of a long-running sitcom.   Very little changes over the course of an individual movie unless it's sanctioned by Kevin Fiege (who holds a stranglehold over the directors, writers, and cinematographers)

 

I think there are multiple other MCU movies which have stakes. Winter Soldier had the collapse of SHIELD, for example. Thor: Ragnarok had the destruction of Asgard. And often there are important *character* stakes in these films. Even smaller scale films like Ant-Man can have stakes. The Guardians of the Galaxy movies certainly did.

 

15 hours ago, Not Mr. Big said:

I never got the "Pocahontas in space" argument.  Like so many other films, Avatar takes inspiration from multiple sources and creates an original new thing.  (Star Wars and Indiana Jones were inspired by the serials of Lucas's youth, Alien was pitched as "Jaws in space").   

 

What don't you get about the "Pocahontas in space" argument? The story beats and execution are almost identical; there are no interesting new elements that I could detect (unless you count Zoe Saldana acting her ass off?) I don't care much about how something is pitched (Star Trek ended up being quite a bit more than "Wagon Train in space"), but how it is executed. Despite their clear influences and inspirations, I can tell you many things about Star Wars/Indiana Jones/Alien which feel fresh.

 

Can you tell me what's original and new and fresh-feeling about Avatar? Somehow John Carter felt a whole lot more fresh to me, despite being based on century-old source material which had since been copied by many other things from Superman to Star Wars to Dune. (I'm sure it helped that I went in with some knowledge/expectations about how it had birthed other sci-fi things, but even setting that aside there were many fresh-feeling elements, for me.) It somehow felt like MORE than just Pocahontas/Dances With Wolves on another planet. The Therns looked fairly human but yet felt somewhat alien and were an intriguing and mysterious threat. The Tharks were clearly influenced by some Earth cultures but also felt a hell of a lot more alien and unique than the Na'vi... who really were completely on-the-nose Native Americans in space in a simplistic 1:1 way.

 

Yavar

[mstrox 5,860]

Pocahontas didn’t have a guy in a freak*ng robot suit at the end

[Edmilson 4,925]

9 minutes ago, mstrox said:

Pocahontas didn’t have a guy in a freak*ng robot suit at the end

It should've had, then the movie would outgross The Lion King!

[Disco Stu 15,475]

There are only two kinds of people in this world: those who know that Avatar was a creative failure and those who haven't realized it yet.

[greenturnedblue 291]

4 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Winter Soldier had the collapse of SHIELD

And the 'death' of Nick Fury, but more like retirement

[Andy 2,526]

6 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

There are only two kinds of people in this world: those who know that Avatar was a creative failure and those who haven't realized it yet.

As I was reading @Yavar Moradi’s post about Pocahontas, it never occurred to me that the very name N’avi could be derived from “Native American” (or simply “Native”).  Does that make me the second kind of person in the world?

 

I think the movie is fine. It’s an okay production, but overlong and overbaked with melodrama and slightly embarrassing material ripe for parody. 
 

Honestly, it’s about as good as the Abyss, a movie I also enjoyed once but felt like that was enough. 

[Disco Stu 15,475]

But it's still James Cameron, so my butt will be in a seat this December to see if he manages to capture some magic.

[Naïve Old Fart 7,933]

One thing about AVATAR that I have never understood:

If the nasty company is trying to wipe out the blue people, then why are they disguising humans as blue people?

[GerateWohl 2,822]

14 hours ago, Edmilson said:

I never saw The Abyss. Is it any good? And which version of the movie should I watch?

 

Alan Silvestri's score is great though.

No matter which version you watch, you should switch it off about 10 minutes before the end. 
A great writer said once, sometimes it would be good, if you could fade out texts like pop song, like the letters just getting lighter and lighter on the last page, if you don’t find a proper ending. 
Same applies to some movies, including „The Abyss“.

[Schilkeman 302]

2 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

One thing about AVATAR that I have never understood:

If the nasty company is trying to wipe out the blue people, then why are they disguising humans as blue people?

I think it was set up as trying to gain their trust and get them to move peacefully. There are certainly parallels to this in American history. I think the one truly original thing Avatar does, and this is more in concept than execution, is have Sully literally become a N'avi. Not just a member of the tribe, but a member of the species. I think it's a neat sci-fi idea that (somewhat, arguably, maybe) avoids the white savior trap of a lot of these stories.

 

In any case, I agree with some here that I would much rather see one auteur's nine figure baby go up in flames than watch another production-line, low-stakes, ephemeral Marvel movie waste two hours of my life. At least he's trying, and who knows, maybe it'll be great.

[GerateWohl 2,822]

1 hour ago, Schilkeman said:

I think the one truly original thing Avatar does, and this is more in concept than execution, is have Sully literally become a N'avi.

And the idea that every creature on the planet has that build in USB plug cable to connect into their global eco network, which is a dump idea. They should have gone for some kind of WiFi connection to their network, but then we would not be able to see the connection and would need to trust their word and viewers could dismiss this as just some kind of religious believe and this then might be too similar to George Lucas concept of the force. So, Cameron had to go for old school plugs.

But the WiFi might be invented in one of the sequels. 

[Schilkeman 302]

Yeah, there’s an element of “ok, sure,” that goes along with sci-fi and fantasy world building. The problems come if the creators aren’t being internally consistent with the world they’ve created. You tell me all the fauna on this planet have LAN connections? Sure I’ll buy that. But you can’t change the rules the next time out.

[Naïve Old Fart 7,933]

59 minutes ago, Schilkeman said:

You tell me all the fauna on this planet have LAN connections?

Maybe, maybe not, but they all have Roger Dean connections 

[AC1 3,886]

Oddly enough, the judge didn't see the connection. 

[Chen G. 3,161]

On 25/08/2022 at 2:56 AM, Yavar Moradi said:

can't fathom how you consider Infinity War or Endgame "stakeless".

 

On their own, they could be seen as somewhat intense. But within the context of what had come before...

 

You can't spoon-feed audiences some 40-odd hours of what are ostensibly action-comedies (actually, I would say, action-farces) and then expect them to take anything seriously.

 

That's the one thing Avatar has over the MCU: its earnest, and in today's world that counts for a lot, at least to me.

[Naïve Old Fart 7,933]

24 minutes ago, AC1 said:

Oddly enough, the judge didn't see the connection. 

He must have been sitting on a roundabout.

[GerateWohl 2,822]

24 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

That's the one thing Avatar has over the MCU: its earnest, and in today's world that counts for a lot, at least to me.

That, at least until Endgame, was a big strength of the MCU. They knew, when to take themselves serious and when not, when the action on the screen became so ridiculous that you only could joke about it. And yes, Avatar is missing that self-awareness, is taking itself way too serious and that way it gets often unintentionally laughable. For that reason I could laugh with the MCU, but only laugh at Avatar.

[Yavar Moradi 1,788]

29 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

On their own, they could be seen as somewhat intense. But within the context of what had come before...

 

You can't spoon-feed audiences some 40-odd hours of what are ostensibly action-comedies (actually, I would say, action-farces) and then expect them to take anything seriously.

 

They aren't all action-comedies. It's understandable that you haven't actually seen all 40-odd hours since you're not an MCU fan, but there's actually quite a bit of variety in MCU content.

 

31 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

That's the one thing Avatar has over the MCU: its earnest, and in today's world that counts for a lot, at least to me.

 

The ironic thing is that IMO, some of the MCU films that are the *most* "action-comedy" are also the most earnest! I'm thinking Guardians of the Galaxy especially. That easily had the most comedic tone of any MCU film up to that point, and yet it also had a good amount of depth, some moments of true emotional power...at least for me. Somehow it simultaneously pulled off both comedy and earnestness quite well, and I'd say the sequel did the same. Another example is Ant-Man: some of the most hilarious comedy in the MCU, particularly with the two Michael Peña-narrated sequences. But also some earnest personal stakes at play, a lovely father/daughter relationship at the heart of the whole thing?

 

Yeah, I'll take the earnestness of Ant-Man or Guardians of the Galaxy, two of the most comedic MCU films, over the puffed up earnestness of Avatar *any* day. But different strokes for different folks I guess!

 

12 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

That, at least until Endgame, was a big strength of the MCU. They knew, when to take themselves serious and when not, when the action on the screen became so ridiculous that you only could joke about it. And yes, Avatar is missing that self-awareness, is taking itself way too serious and that way it gets often unintentionally laughable. For that reason I could laugh with the MCU, but only laugh at Avatar.

 

Well put.

 

Yavar

[Not Mr. Big 4,210]

23 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Can you tell me what's original and new and fresh-feeling about Avatar? Somehow John Carter felt a whole lot more fresh to me, despite being based on century-old source material which had since been copied by many other things from Superman to Star Wars to Dune. (I'm sure it helped that I went in with some knowledge/expectations about how it had birthed other sci-fi things, but even setting that aside there were many fresh-feeling elements, for me.) It somehow felt like MORE than just Pocahontas/Dances With Wolves on another planet. The Therns looked fairly human but yet felt somewhat alien and were an intriguing and mysterious threat. The Tharks were clearly influenced by some Earth cultures but also felt a hell of a lot more alien and unique than the Na'vi... who really were completely on-the-nose Native Americans in space in a simplistic 1:1 way.

The multicolored, phosphorescent nature of the world was a fresh new visual idea.  To the point where several blockbusters mimicked its style (Maleficent is the first to come to mind).  The idea of fucking something with your hair braid and then also connecting to trees and animals with that same hair braid was a unique idea.  The various parts of the Na'Vi culture may be taken from Pocahontas and real-life Native American culture but it still feels like its own distinct thing.

 

John Carter was fine but got so bogged down in "sci-fi names" (Scoon of Broon, the Bjornslasher of Sploon) and exposition dumps that didn't serve the plot.  Avatar in comparison doles out lore far more gradually and with far more significance in plot (pretty much everything  comes into play at some point).  

[Bellosh 1,921]

23 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

There are only two kinds of people in this world: those who know that Avatar was a creative failure and those who haven't realized it yet.

 

i rewatched it a year after it came out and couldn't believe i enjoyed it so much in the theater.  probably cause it was the pinnacle of 3-D movie going experiences, plus the crowd in the theater had a good vibe.

 

awful movie. good score though.

[Chen G. 3,161]

1 hour ago, GerateWohl said:

That, at least until Endgame, was a big strength of the MCU

 

Disagree.

 

I like movies to be earnest. Period.

[GerateWohl 2,822]

23 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

Disagree.

 

I like movies to be earnest. Period.

Then you might be rather the DC type, when it comes to superhero movies.

1 hour ago, Not Mr. Big said:

The idea of fucking something with your hair braid and then also connecting to trees and animals with that same hair braid was a unique idea. 

A bad idea.

1 hour ago, Not Mr. Big said:

The multicolored, phosphorescent nature of the world was a fresh new visual idea. 

The idea of the phosphorescent 80s disco black light forrest reminded me in the first place of the old Jules Verne movie „Voyage to the Center of the Earth“ where they realize in that cave that when they extinguish their torches the cave gets enlighted by the minerals around.

[Nick1Ø66 3,772]

On 24/8/2022 at 11:13 PM, Yavar Moradi said:

My problem with Avatar is how UNoriginal it is.

 

Meh. Here's the thing...part of what made Avatar so successful is that is a simple story. That story, which as you mentioned has been told many times before (Dances With Wolves, Pocahontas, Last Samurai, etc.) has a universality, and simplicity to it, that people connect with. It's an old story, and clearly strikes a chord with audiences. 

 

Say what you will about Cameron, he's a smart director. He knew exactly what he was doing. He knew well enough that he couldn't throw all this new technology at audiences, and feature a film consisting entirely of blue giants running around in a totally CGI environment and tell a complicated story with complex characters. Avatar was supposed to be an experience that immersed you in a totally different world for a couple of hours. If you spent a lot of time having to think about plot, that spell would have been broken. From a filmmaking standpoint, by giving the audience a kind of cinematic comfort food in terms of the story, it made them more open to the completely new visual experience they were seeing. The audience was a fish out of water on Pandora, as the protagonist was, and by the end they went native as he did. It's brilliant what Cameron did, actually (and Cuarón made much the same choice in Gravity). The un-originality, as you call it, was a feature, not a bug.  And obviously, the success of the film speaks for itself.

 

That said, Avatar does in fact lose much of its power on repeated viewings (as does Gravity), especially watching at home...I enjoyed in the cinema, but barely got through a second viewing on Blu-Ray. When you take away the immersive experience, the movie's thinness in plot and character do come to the forefront. So if I seems like I'm a great lover of this film, I'm not. I just respect that Cameron knew what he was doing. 

[NL197 364]

^^ Very true statements. 

James Horner also said at the time of release, that he needed to pull the music back from being avant garde and too 'alien' to what the final result was, because audiences will tolerate unconventional visuals, but not unconventional music for a big film like that, so it had to be grounded in something more palatable. 

[Yavar Moradi 1,788]

6 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Meh. Here's the thing...part of what made Avatar so successful is that is a simple story. That story, which as you mentioned has been told many times before (Dances With Wolves, Pocahontas, Last Samurai, etc.) has a universality, and simplicity to it, that people connect with. It's an old story, and clearly strikes a chord with audiences.

When did I say I had a problem with simple stories? Simple stories can often be done GREAT! And simple stories can be quite original too!

 

My issue with Avatar is that it didn’t do much of anything fresh or interesting. It didn’t engage me. I thought it was fine; it was competent. I’d certainly take it over a Star Wars prequel any day. James Cameron knows how to tell a story and is an excellent director technically.

 

But this story (re)telling didn’t do anything that made me ever want to see it (or a sequel) again. It was tired and far too derivative, to me. There was just nothing much interesting about it!

 

Interesting that you also bring up Gravity. My wife and I love Cuaron’s films generally. But the same thing happened with that when we saw it in theater: I thought it was surprisingly mediocre (and therefore disappointing, because my expectations/hopes were high), and my wife HATED it so much that she was angry at me for pushing her to go see it with me. Lol. I think these are actually the only two films I can say this about strangely enough, and we’ve probably seen over 100 films together in theater at this point…

 

At least in some way we are on the same wavelength, because you admit both films have low rewatchability value. I just got there one watch sooner. Whatever you found less than engaging on a second watch for them? Well that’s probably what I found unengaging on my first watch.

 

Fancy special effects just aren’t enough to engage me and paper over lame storytelling. 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

 

I respect Cameron as a filmmaker too. Avatar is literally the first thing of his which has produced this reaction in me. And for what it’s worth I not only like Aliens, both Terminators (especially the second), True Lies, Titanic, and his Dark Angel show, but I also think all of those have good rewatch value.

 

Is Avatar the first James Cameron thing you’ve seen that you felt had poor rewatch value?

 

Yavar

[LSH 830]

I'm quite looking forward to it.

[GerateWohl 2,822]

I think, the two factors why Avatar felt to me fresh in no way was the awfully unoriginal way to show an alien culture in all the cliches of native americans inluding indian chief and medicine man weapons and even jewelry and this way taking the for science fiction required other worldliness out of it. Yes, I know. Lucas did with the Ewoks almost the same. But that actually was some kind of cartoon act and didn’t take itself so serious. And it was just one side point in the movie and not what the whole story was about. And secondly, Cameron had already covered or even invented this marines fighting aliens on another planet genre in Aliens and he didn’t add anything interesting to it here.

 

But I am sure the underwater images in the new movie will be marvelous.