It's none of those things -- well, not always -- but when someone's
only comment is "it's just like [one of a half dozen films]" then I think
they aren't thinking but just parroting someone else's comment, to
be on the "cool" bandwagon. There's definitely stuff to knock in
Avatar, but way too many seem to not be able to come up with any
of it. No one's saying you aren't thinking nor that you dismissed the
film. I disagree that comparable plots is a negative but you had
other negative points as well. You clearly did think about it. I don't
completely agree with you but everyone's entitled to their opinion.
I just see a lot of people who are simply on a "knock Cameron" kick.
Craig.
At 11:22 AM 2/16/2010, James Richard wrote:
So it's now just "uncool" or "jealousy" or "the old dude just
doesn't get it" to make a perfectly valid observation or criticism of a film?
Guess I have lived too long.
--JR
Jeff Potokar wrote:
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: <mailto:douglasbtay...@hotmail.com>douglasbtay...@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: AVATAR
> To: <mailto:MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU>MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
>
> 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:mop...@listserv.american.edu] On
Behalf Of Kirby McDaniel
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 11:18 PM
> To: <mailto:MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU>MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
> 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:
<mailto:lists...@listserv.american.edu>lists...@listserv.american.edu
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 <mailto:cr...@wolfmill.com>cr...@wolfmill.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at
<http://www.filmfan.com>www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to:
<mailto:lists...@listserv.american.edu>lists...@listserv.american.edu
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
<http://www.filmfan.com>www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to:
<mailto:lists...@listserv.american.edu>lists...@listserv.american.edu
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: lists...@listserv.american.edu
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 cr...@wolfmill.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
