Well put, Craig.
Its SO easy to knock one's project or film down. I dont get it. And
from so many people who know little to nothing about what it actually
takes to make and put a film of this caliber together.
Jealousy perhaps, or the fact that Cameron has another colossal hit
in his pocket, i suppose.
Jeff
On Feb 16, 2010, at 10:17 AM, Craig Miller wrote:
I can't say how tired I am of the "oh, Avatar is just like movie X"
complaint.
Sorry. If it's just like Pocahontas, Dances With Wolves,
Ferngully, The
Last Samurai, Lawrence of Arabia, and The Last of the Mohicans (and
it's like all of them) that should tell you that it's a common
story trope used
by countless writers. To complain of it is to say "The West Side
Story is
a piece of crap. It's just like Romeo and Juliet." The last movie
I saw that
didn't harken to the plot of something else was Being John
Malkovich. Is
Avatar perfect? No. Is it's script great? Nope. But to say there
are plot
similarities to something else is fatuous. If that's all someone
can complain
about, then they're just looking for something to knock. (And
Cameron has
a lot of people who like to knock him, though I think he's got a
truly amazing
track record.)
Craig.
At 11:15 PM 2/15/2010, David Kusumoto wrote:
** It's been a while I've written anything of length to MoPo;
write it off to being too swamped to get into the fights and what-
nots during the past 5-6 months.
** Meanwhile, you're right, Doug -- "Avatar's" story line has been
done 1,000 times before, and that's my only objection to it.
"Avatar's" script resembled "Dances With Wolves Meets the Blue Man
Group" -- with the standard theme of "money-grubbing corporations"
raping the natural resources of a planet populated by blue aliens
-- whose every utterance is noble and forcefully profound, e.g.,
like lines given to every Native American character in Disney's
"Pocahontas."
** Anyway, I was put in my place by a former colleague and mother
of two kids who agreed with me -- but who told me -- (and she was
right) -- "you know, you and your historical film references makes
you old and out of date -- it makes everything you see today sound
irrelevant with a "been there and done that" feeling. Well,
that's not true for everything. Zillions of people are paying $15
to see 'Avatar' without your historical references; they don't
care about "Dances with Wolves" or "Pocahontas." Even if they
did, those pictures were made 15-20 years ago, before today's
movie goers were born; they were made in ways that seem obsolete
or less engaging to kids today. This doesn't mean old films are
less important. It just means they're not important to young
people YET. Someday they'll like them. Like we did. Geezuz, we
weren't all born in 1920. Young people buy WAY more tickets than
old people. Remember how you used to go to every opening night?
You don't anymore because you hate long lines. You're not
supporting the industry and you're well past the 'sell-by' date
for mass entertainment. So stay at home and watch PBS, TCM or
HBO. 'Avatar" may not be the best picture of the year, but it is
historic and my kids loved it."
** I thought about this tirade for a moment and I said, "you know,
you're right. Most people coming out of 'Avatar' are having fun
-- and I admit it's astounding that a guy like James Cameron can
knock out hit after monster hit, while having total control of
material that, unlike Spielberg, always seems to strike industry
watchers and the bean counters to have an "iffy" quality -- BEFORE
they're released. Cameron's films never SEEM to feel like they
will be guaranteed box office gold until AFTER word-of-mouth
spreads."
** The box-office receipts of Cameron's last three films including
"True Lies" -- have blown past everything Spielberg has done since
1993, including "Jurassic Park," a film at the time I thought was
a technological game changer. I just wonder whether "Avatar,"
even as a "game changer" -- has a story/script worthy enough to be
a Best Picture. "Titanic" beat back those same obstacles in 1997
with an old-fashioned, 1940s type love story that had teenage
girls returning in droves.
** I liked low-budget picture, "The Hurt Locker" -- and was
shocked that I also enjoyed the true story of Baltimore Ravens
tackle Michael Oher in Sandra Bullock's "The Blind Side" -- but
"Avatar" didn't hit me in the gut. Honestly, the best
performances I saw in 2009 came from Meryl Streep as Julia Child
in "Julie and Julia" and Christoph Waltz as the smooth Nazi in
"Inglourious Basterds."
** If I had to root for a single picture, it might be "The Hurt
Locker," but only because I think it's the first picture about the
war without a political message; none of the actors "debate" why
they're in Iraq. There's no sledgehammer message. It's a strange
film whereby the emotional centerpiece is the adrenaline of
survival; some soldiers have it and some don't; this adrenaline is
all that matters to the main character played by Best Actor
nominee Jeremy Renner. I also thought "The Hurt Locker" was a
giant leap for action director Kathryn Bigelow, who's never done
anything like this. If anything, its neutral political stance
underscores how many soldiers are ignorant of the politics of
anything they're involved in. They just do their job.
** But my gut feeling is the 9 films going against "Avatar" -- all
have the "Gandhi" hex hung around their necks. That is, if any
picture OTHER than "Avatar" wins -- it will be a dubious
distinction akin to "Forrest Gump" beating "The Shawshank
Redemption" and "Pulp Fiction" in 1994; "Shakespeare in Love"
beating "Saving Private Ryan" in 1998; "Chariots of Fire" beating
"Reds" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark" in 1981; "Ordinary People"
beating "Raging Bull" in 1980; "Platoon" beating " Woody Allen's
"Hannah and Her Sisters" in 1986; "The English Patient" beating
"Fargo" in 1996; "Dances with Wolves" beating "Goodfellas" in 1990
and "Gandhi" beating "E.T" in 1982 and on and on. I remember
being angry when Oliver Stone's "Platoon" beat Woody Allen's
"Hannah" in '86, the latter film much decorated in the all-
important acting and screenplay categories. And last week, I put
on "Shawshank" on the DVD player and my wife and I were in tears
all over again. Still a great picture.
** I know the Oscars are such bullshit (and not the original point
of Doug and Kirby's posts below) -- and I know these trophies are
laden with the "politics of their day" -- which have proven time
and again that the Academy's choices do not a classic make. But
if "Avatar" loses, I sense many will feel like they've witnessed
the "crime of the century," further exposing the gulf between the
Academy and popular sentiment (arguably as they should be) -- but
over a picture that is not only a box-office smash, but has also
received good-to-great reviews. I won't mind if "Avatar" wins
because I do know people who think despite its high-school-ish
script (esp. the romance) -- that the picture is a critical and
commercial juggernaut that should NOT be denied the biggest prize
on March 7, which has forced many production companies to re-tool
their future releases to integrate the 3D format in a "non-
intrusive" way, which is "Avatar's" biggest strength.
** Despite 10 Best Picture nominees, I'm kind of indifferent this
year, not one film screams "stupendous." But I was emotionally
responsive to 5 of the nearly 35 films released in 2009, one of
which is not even among the 10 nominees: "The Hurt Locker," "The
Blind Side," "Up," "Inglourious Basterds" (despite its excesses)
-- and "The (500) Days of Summer," the latter which I thought was
going to be a stupid, sophomoric young-love beach film -- but
turned out to be a new way of telling a story about a broken urban
romance that doesn't get near a beach or a keg-party. Wonderful
surprise.
** A digression -- I did not object to "Annie Hall" beating "Star
Wars" in 1977. "Annie Hall" was a film I saw in contemporaneous
release and I did feel at the time that it broke new ground for
Woody Allen and for the "urban comedy genre" in a different way
that "Star Wars" broke bigger ground for family entertainment the
same year. But I also vividly remember going to work the next
day. My work mates asked me, with great incredulity, "Star Wars
lost to Annie WHAT? Your movie choices SUCK." I loved both films
but I've never forgotten how that experience exposed me as a high-
button, stuck-up, holier-than-thou snob. -d.
> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:31:56 -0500
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: AVATAR
> To: [email protected]
>
> Much better script than Titanic, although a story line we've
seen 1,000
> times the last 90 years.
>
> I've haven't seen anything better this year. I had high hopes
for Hurt
> Locker, but it just doesn't pack the punch to compete.
>
> Regards
>
> DBT
> Profile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MoPo List [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Kirby McDaniel
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 11:18 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [MOPO] AVATAR
>
> Here's my reaction.
>
> I finally saw it.
>
> Spectacularly realized. Doesn't lag much. Screenwriting is a little
> stilted at times while trying to explain things to audience 8 to
80, but
> that's quibbling. Gorgeous in 3D on the full IMAX screen. 3D is
some of the best I've ever
> seen in that it seems to be "of a piece" with the film after a
while. Very beautiful to
> look at. Reminded me at various times of aspects of other films
- LAWRENCE OF ARABIA,
> ALIENS, of course, THE STAR WARS stuff, naturally, although
without the Flash
> Gordon cornball factor, especially RETURN OF THE JEDI with it's
scenes of the ewoks.
> And BAMBI of all things -- I was looking at some of the color in
the Disney
> animation the other day, and some of the same coloration and
tone in AVATAR.
> So huge in its palette that one just simply has to hand it to
James Cameron - he
> must be some kind of superman. The film is laden with messages,
but it's
> all stuff I can pretty much get behind. What surprised me was
how touching
> it was at times.
>
> Oh yeah, really cute people. And they're blue. It's not easy
being blue.
>
> Kirby McDaniel
> MovieArt Original Film Posters
> P.O. Box 4419
> Austin TX 78765-4419
> 512 479 6680 www.movieart.net
> mobile 512 589 5112
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Craig Miller Wolfmill Entertainment [email protected]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
