Comments on: “Avatar” Review | Ryan Responds to Aaron

By: 2009 The Year in Movies | 10 – 19 | Pop Bunker

2009 The Year in Movies | 10 – 19 | Pop Bunker — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:14:16 +0000

[...] words have been written about this movie than I care to think. I have decided against reviewing it [...]

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:19:06 +0000

It isn’t like me!

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:33:24 +0000

I think half the reason I even get worked up about it is that it doesn't seem like you. .-= Aaron´s last blog ..College Basketball Musings =-.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 08:32:54 +0000

Yeah, normally I’m all about character and plot. I almost never like action movies, even the supposedly good ones. In this case, I was so overwhelmed by the visuals that I really didn’t care about the plot or characters at all. That never happens to me, and this was an exception.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 01:32:44 +0000

Yeah, I recognize that the visual experience was unlike anything I've seen. It was thrilling, particularly during the final scenes. But movies are stories, not tech demos. When you say story doesn't matter, you're saying you want a tech demo, which doesn't have a story. No, the story is essential, or it wouldn't be spoken of in these terms. I think you're right, it's just a matter of weighting factors. Our story factors must be weighted much more differently than I thought, because it seems like we have exactly the same take on the film, Ryan and I. Yet I find myself vehemently protesting at all this. Perhaps the real difference is within the story factor; we like different kinds of stories. For what it's worth, I thought Star Trek had an incredible story. .-= Aaron´s last blog ..College Basketball Musings =-.

By: Skipaway

Skipaway — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 01:16:09 +0000

I posted a comment!

By: Dale Cooper

Dale Cooper — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:58:48 +0000

I think the question comes down to weighing elements wrt movie quality. To me acting, narrative, and buy-in (tactile director skills) rate about x1.5 in importance while CGI rates about .30. So for me even if I score the movie a 10 visually, that is a baseline 3. The rest of the movie is not enough to push it past a 6-7 on a 10 scale. Not a terrible movie, but only memorable for the gimmicky stuff which makes it exactly like a roller coaster for me; only fun while I’m on it.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:33:28 +0000

I guess I didn't feel like it was a paradigm shift or whatever, and maybe that's because you had to wait two hours for the best visual stuff (the final battle [every time I say or type that, I have to say it in Cartman's voice in my head]). Honest to goodness, I was straight bored during Jake's "joining the tribe" phase. To throw out another Parker-Stone reference, Jim Cameron needs to learn that everything is better with a montage. Seriously though, chop an hour off the movie, and I'll like it a lot more. At any rate, my fundamental disagreement with you seems to be the degree to which the visual goods are good. .-= Aaron´s last blog ..College Basketball Musings =-.