Going back to the OP: people actually say that?
Did they watch both movies?
Going back to the OP: people actually say that?
Did they watch both movies?
See THIS is why I don't pay attention to hype - anyone who does will either blindly follow the crowed, or hold up a cross to it for fear of looking like they're following the crowed - just have your own opinions.Originally Posted by Sephiroth
This sounds like you both agree ("just have your own opinions") and disagree ("for fear of looking like they're following the crowed") with me so please tell me what you mean.
If you go to the Internet Movie Database some overzealous fanboys will say "Avatar is better than The Dark Knight by a lot, and if you don't agree then you're an idiot."
But when I call them out on it, I say, "The Dark Knight and Avatar are two completely different movies and if you can't tell the difference between a crime drama and an alien movie then YOU are idiot!" And I usually get ignored by the original poster.
What I mean is some people will refuse to like something PURELY because they don't want to join the hyped up crowed, rather than simply trying the said something (film, programme, video game etc) and seeing if they like it themselves. I always give things ago, and don't care if they're are "in" or not. Does that make more sense, I'll try to explain further if you like, it's difficult to put in words really.
No, it is okay like you have explained. But it is not that I don't watch it because I don't want to be a part of a hype, I don't watch it because I already know how they characters look like and this is a normal reason for not watching a movie. I have noticed in my first post I wrote "And because of that avatar hype I have never watched it". That's not true. I will edit it. It simply is annoying to hear how awesome and wonderful it is because of the graphics. And that's all I have said before. Because graphics cannot be the main reason to be the best movie ever. And it is not like there were just C64 graphics before Avatar has existed. There already were high quality animations.
How did these movies get lumped together? They are completely different in storyline, tone, and message. The only similarities are they are intended as mass entertainment.
On the subject of inspiration for Avatar it also owes quite a lot to both Dances with Wolves and Dune. It's certainly popular, but that's not the same as being great. Visually it's quite gorgeous, but the plot is hokey and predictable. One of the most blatant deus ex machina plot resolutions ever. But for all that, it is an entertaining popcorn movie, but it's not even remotely close to being one of the best movies of all time.
The Dark Knight is a better film, not just because the actors sell their characters better, rather than being subsumed by special effects. In addition the story is about morality and ethics when confronted with evil. Avatar has a much simpler good-versus-evil conflict, with the side that every character eventually choses completely obvious from the moment we are introduced to each.
James Cameron is on the cutting edge of special effects, but he plays it very safe when it comes to screenplays.
POCAHONTAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can see the similarity with Dances with Wolves, but Dune? Maybe the movie, but not really the novel.
And people got post-Avatar depression because they linked the harvesting of unobtainium with many of our activities and realised that humans are harming the planet!!!!! In related news, water is wet.
So yeah, I would (and I don't want to sound mean) consider those people ignorant. Most of us are already aware of this fact and have dealt with it. But it must have come as quite a shock initially.
The Dark Knight just comes across as pretentious movie making to me. Good for one or two viewings but no more. Avatar is easy to watch and does have a few notable advantages over The Dark Knight. For one James Cameron can actually choreograph an action scene well unlike Christopher Nolan. I'm a rather simple guy so I appreciate that stuff more than nuanced dialogue and complex narratives.
what does this mean then?No, it is okay like you have explained. But it is not that I don't watch it because I don't want to be a part of a hype
I am one of the guys who doesn't just follow the stream.Before you edited that post you didn't say you knew the whole thing that makes the movie which is the visuals, sound effects, and story.I have seen it and say it is overrated. And that's it.
Last edited by Depression Moon; 06-26-2010 at 01:08 AM.
The whole plot revolves around an off worlder who goes native with the indigenous people, falls in love with one of them and leads them to victory against their enemies . Of course that's similar to Dances with Wolves as well, but for the fact that the hero exploits legends of a messiah and actually becomes what he was pretending to be. And the fighting over a rare and precious resource (spice/unobtanium) that is only available on one planet.
And the miniseries is much better than the David Lynch movie.
BG-57, I agree with you on those points, but Dune is a lot more complex than Avatar. Paul Atreides being the Kwisatz Haderach, the actual effect of the spice, both as a prescient drug and the impact it has on civilisation, the relationship between society, religion and politics - this could go on forever. And the Fremen weren't spiritually in touch with the planet as in Avatar, they were just more aware of the conditions of it as they lived in the deep desert (although that is kind of similar to Avatar). And the Fremen were trying to terraform Dune.
Basically, Dune > Avatar. In my opinion.
It was the scenery porn that sold it for me, I guess-- the pretty settings was probably the only thing that kept me amused throughout the whole movie. I thought it was pretty boring otherwise-- and yes, as overrated as you say. :x
The Dark Knight was far better as far as everything else goes, if you ask me.
I see what you mean. I agree that films (or anything) shouldn't be concidered "the best ever" because of how it looks. I thought Avatar looked great, but that's not why I liked it, I loved the storyline even though I had heared it before (think ESPERS!) I think they did well taking a "done" story and making it good. IMO, but that's just me - but yeah, the graphics were the least important factor in the end, if I had hated the film the graphics would have paled into insignificance.
That's simply a lie because I wrote it in every single post here and has nothing to do with my edit. I've even complained about people not reading my posts properly because they didn't read that I know these things about Avatar. You can read it in all my posts.
And now I will stop replying. I wrote even more than I wanted.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
