comment #1

VictorLazlo says ...

The bad buzz on this thing is amazing. It'll be interesting to see what "Joe Sixpack" thinks.

I tried to love the trailer. I watched it in HD but...just no. I don't know how 3D will improve those lame aliens.

As to the Delgo/Ferngully comparison, I think its a reaction to the shocking unoriginality of the concept and visual design. Has Cameron been in a bubble for the last ten years? Has he not kept an eye on the latest sci fi trends? Why didn't anyone tell him his groundbreaking vision wasn't so groundbreaking... sigh.

comment #2

RSBrown says ...

D'fuck is "Delgo"?

comment #3

EdHavens says ...

I'm not particularly thrilled with the trailer either, but to say one needs to catch it in 3D in order for it to work is to say a scary statement. Even if the film opens in 2500 or 3000 Digital 3D screens in December, which is not assured, that's still 1000 to 1500 plus screens that will be in 2D, and millions of people who will be less than satisfied if the film only works in a different format.

comment #4

Pynchon8 says ...

Based on Cameron's rather shoddy depiction of humans in his movies and his general behavior towards people, yes, I think he leaves in some sort of bubble, when not literally in a diving bubble.

comment #5

Rich S. says ...

Wow, those comparisons are really something. Obviously not identical, but some of the stills are uncomfortably close.

Of course, stuff like this happens all the time in Hollywood (Deep Impact/Armageddon, Bug's Life/Antz, etc.). I'm sure the plots of the two movies will be completely different. But this certainly gives those commenters who complained in the earlier threads of Cameron's lack of imagination some ammo.

comment #6

corey3rd says ...

the all look like the Yes album covers done by Roger Dean

comment #7

bryce_david says ...

The comparison is too funny and just points out that the two products, AVATAR & DELGO, are just cliched filled imagery you can find on any sci-fi, fantasy book/magazine cover.

The thing that surprises me is why is everyone surprised that AVATAR isn't original. The basic story, a guy in a wheelchair is given a second chance at life, is basically a rip-off of Star Trek's Menagerie episode. Cameron was sued by Harlan Ellison because Terminator was "inspired" by the Twilight Zone he wrote. Ellison won. The Abyss is basically Close Encounters under the sea. Titanic, well, don't need to go into that one.

Cameron has always blatantly borrowed from other sources for his films, more than your average filmmaker.

comment #8

Catman says ...

I'm with Jeff on this. Having seen the CC preview, I think people are severely underestimating how awesome "Avatar" is going to look on a huge screen in 3D. As to the story, let's be honest, he stinks as a writer, but nobody goes to a Cameron movie for the writing. They go because the story gives him a structure to do incredible visuals that combined with the character's predictament, usually have an enormous emotional impact, which is what Big Jim is after. As to the parallels, yes, Cameron has been in a bubble all these years. One of the reasons he kept such a tight lid on the film is so that theft would be kept at a minimum (remember Michael Crichton did the same thing with his books - not a boo about the subject until they came out) . Unfortunately he's a militaristic pacificist (I know it's a contradiction) so we're getting "Dances with Dragons" as a plotline (remember "Avatar" goes back fourteen years) which is its major liability, but I still believe that by the end of the movie, however long it is, people are going to be wowed by its visuals and emotional impact. "Avatar" already is a game changer in that it's driving 3D gaming technology, 3D video technology, and 3D filmmaking technology. People nitpicking this thing on the basis of a two minute trailer are making serious asses of themselves and should at least give Cameron the benefit of the doubt until they see it on a big screen...

comment #9

Steven Kar says ...

If a trailer does its job, then it should amaze EVEN when seen on a small screen in 2D.

Why is it now necessary to watch a trailer in 3D digitally projected on an IMAX screen with superior sound quality in order to be amazed by it?

I first watched the TITANIC trailer in 1997 on a shitty computer screen and was instantly amazed by the visuals. Two months later, I watched the movie on a regular movie screen (in 2D!) and was blown away by the images.

If a movie looks good, looks exciting, has some terrific stuff going on, then even in 2D and on a small screen, it should get me hooked. The AVATAR trailer just did not.

It's a trailer, that's what it's supposed to do: excite, tease, and seduce, in less than 3 minutes, and this trailer didn't. And this is coming from a big JC fan, a big sci-fi fan, and a big CGI fan.

comment #10

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Wells to VictorLazlo: The proper name is Joe Popcorn. Joe Sixpack is a cultural figure who responds to various hot-button issues in the political realm. They know each other, live in the same neck, park their cars in the same garage. Except Joe Popcorn is a kind of older movie-buff who sees movies once every two or three weeks, although his movie-love is defined by a limited attitude and education (having never watched films like L'avventura or The Hit or Office Space or Martin Scorsese's My Voyage in Italy) and diminished (i.e., conventional) spiritual vistas. JP tends to stick to easily-digestible, heavily advertised, broadly-commercial fare. I call him "older" in the sense that he's not one of the Eloi, which is an under-25 kneejerk moviegoing culture that always attends the latest big-studio idiot flick, no matter how Godawful or wretched the online buzz, out of feelings of peer pressure and needing/wanting to hang with their homies on Friday and Saturday night, etc.

comment #11

mutinyco says ...

The difference between a movie designed for 3D on the big screen vs. a 2D Quicktime on your computer is like seeing Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm vs. a VHS pan-and-scan.

comment #12

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

"Cameron was sued by Harlan Ellison because Terminator was "inspired" by the Twilight Zone he wrote. Ellison won."

Not true, actually. Common misconception/urban myth. Ellison threatened with a case, and Orion made a screen credit/cash settlement out of court.

I realize this is cutting hairs (he may very well have lost if the trial proceeded), but the lawsuit never even saw the light of day in court. The PR department made sure of that.

comment #13

Rich S. says ...

mutinyco,

The first time I saw Lawrence of Arabia was on a 25" console television, with commercial breaks. Even with those limitations, I still knew it was brilliant.

comment #14

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

"As to the story, let's be honest, he stinks as a writer, but nobody goes to a Cameron movie for the writing."

Well, you have to specify what kind of writing you're talking about, exactly. Does he stink as a writer of dialogue? Sure. But the plotting for Aliens and esp. Terminator is very tight. These are very economical screenplays that build character traits and weave thematic motifs through their action sequences. The same can be said, to a lesser degree, for T2 and The Abyss.

Not a whole lot of other genre directors have the distinction of such a solid history.

comment #15

JohnnyM says ...

You need to see this movie in 3D to see if it really is the game changer he says it is. To pile hate on a 2 minute trailer without viewing it in its intended medium is ignorant.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1208038/Avatar-How-James-Camerons-3D-film-change-face-cinema-forever.html

comment #16

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

No offense, Jeff, but I'm pretty sure Joe Popcorn has seen Office Space. Hell, that is probably one of JP's favorite comedies of the last 10 years.

Other than that, I totally agree with you.

comment #17

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

Further splitting hairs - it was 2 episodes ("Soldier" and "Demon With A Glass Hand" - which I doubt Jeff has even heard of) that Cameron himself has acknowledged inspired the story. Their actual connection to the story is very thin, but Hemdale was smart to settle: Ellison has a undefeated (IIRCC) record in court.

I, for one, love the fact that we are now seeing images on screen to finally match all those classic sci-fi and fantasy dustcovers from the 70's & 80's. CGI has allowed filmmakers to finally achieve what was impossible with conventional FX.

comment #18

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

I'm fairly excited for the 3D preview tonight. Are the glasses specially created for the film, or are they the same grimy-ass ones they gave out for Harry Potter on the 3D IMAX? That left me very underwhelmed.

comment #19

Brendan says ...

Jeff,

Great post back to VictorLazlo. Can we have a post one day about all of the characters that live on Theater Going Public Lane (maybe it's a cul-de-sac)? I can envision the picture being from the classic Twilight Zone episode "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street". So we have Joe Popcorn, Joe Sixpack, the Eloi and there have to be more that I have missed....

comment #20

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

Ditto on Chewie's point - every JP knows the line "I showed her my 'Oh' face."

Trust me.

comment #21

Wrecktem says ...

Those Ellison episodes were on The Outer Limits, not The Twilight Zone.

comment #22

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

"You need to see this movie in 3D to see if it really is the game changer he says it is. To pile hate on a 2 minute trailer without viewing it in its intended medium is ignorant."

Yeah, in fairness to Cameron -- and I'm the first to admit he is a bit of a narcissistic bastard -- most of his comments about Avatar being a game-changer are directly related to its 3D technology. I don't ever think he's been on record as saying it's one of the best science fiction films ever made (at least not yet).

I also don't necessarily think that all game-changers are necessarily great movies. I'd argue that Young Sherlock Holmes (CGI), The Blair Witch Project (mockumentary assembled from "lost footage"), and the SW prequels (digital projection) are all more interesting than "good."

I just looked it up and I'll Never Forget What's'isname is thought to be one of the first movies to drop the f-bomb. You certainly hear a lot of those dropped in cinema today, but I don't think I ever met someone who actually saw that film.

comment #23

raygo says ...

People don't get to go to a Cameron film very often, regardless of the writing. There hasn't been one in 11 years. I always wondered why no one mentions the 1953 Titantic with Clifton Webb and Barbara Stanwyck, from he stole most of his movie.

comment #24

corey3rd says ...

Joe Sofa watches Office Space since it' always on cable

comment #25

raygo says ...

And can we get a Lovely Bones thread started?? Please?

comment #26

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

"I always wondered why no one mentions the 1953 Titantic with Clifton Webb and Barbara Stanwyck, from he stole most of his movie."

I knew he got that whole boat sinking thing from somewhere...

comment #27

cinemascopian says ...

The Avatar preview is over here in Tel Aviv. I skipped it, but the text and Twitter reactions from colleagues are horrible. Being a Cameron fan I'm quite shocked (and doubly intrigued now). I rounded up some of the reactions on my Twitter page: https://twitter.com/cinemascopian

comment #28

JohnnyM says ...

@WonkeyDonkey - according to the article I linked, the glasses will not be the traditional red/blue ones, but new ones that polarize light differently.

comment #29

bulltron says ...

Wanted to get a final thought on the trailer in before the discussion shifts to tonight's preview footage. A trailer for an event movie succeeds by either telling you what to expect then denying you a glimpse at it (Jurassic Park). Or delivering at least one image that is supposed to blow you away. Ex. Matrix (bullet time), Cloverfield (Lady Liberty's head rolling down the street), or Independence Day (White House blowing up). Regardless of what you think about those movies, the trailers work. Avatar's draw is the aliens, and for most they aren't cutting it.

comment #30

MovieBob says ...

"Fanboys" were ALWAYS going to be the hardest to please because so much less is "new" to them than it is to the average moviegoer or, frankly, most critics.

Show your 'avergae' moviegoer this trailer and... well, they'll probably complain that nobody is talking... BUT on a visual level "blue-skinned cat-people versus guys driving giant robots on planet of flying islands" is going to be "whoa, that's pretty out-there."

Whereas to "fanboys" (new word needed. stat) almost ALL of these visuals are pretty familiar. They've seen the kitty-people in Thundercats, they've seen the mecha-battlesuits in Gundam/Battletech/whatever, they've seen the alien-biotech-vs-guns in Jedi, Battle for Terra, whatever, maybe they've seen the same basic floaty-planetoids in Legend of Zu a few years back... and they've been seeing it all mixed up together on the cover of every comic, pulp-anthology, genre-paperback, anime series and video game for the last several DECADES. These are NOT people you sell on the basis of "you've NEVER seen this before;" because they're life's work is "seeing"/knowing/cataloguing things that almost no one has seen before. The last time it was actually accomplished was "Matrix," and even then it was with the caveat "you've never seen this before... in live-action."

You'll see them turn around once (if?) the actual narrative begins to congeal. Once they've got names and tech-specs to attach to the space-gear, alien characters to 'relate' (read: compose alarming fan-fiction... the idea that Worthington seems to 'transfer' himself into an alien body so he can - I'm assuming - hook up with the lead alien female will make this a MUST-SEE to the furry/transhumanism set) to, races and tribes and organizations to keep track of and catalogue, they'll be all set.

comment #31

VictorLazlo says ...

Fair enough Wells, Joe Popcorn it is.

But wasn't it Joe Popcorn that made movies like Lawrence of Arabia, THe Godfather and Taxi Driver hits in the 60s and 70s? If I'm not mistaken Joe Popcorn has some discerning taste, he's just not heavily invested or educated about film in general?

Joe Popcorn is the target audience for GOOD popular entertainment.

comment #32

Gogocrank says ...

Frankly, from the looks of what's been released so far, even the effects in "The Fountain" were much more original, but maybe that was because that movie was up against it. Can anyone think of a director who finally gets everything he's always wanted to make his dream project and actually hits it out of the park? Scorsese? ("Gangs of New York," no.) Jackson? ("King Kong," no.) Even the best filmmakers come undone with a blank check budget and carte blanche power.

comment #33

corey3rd says ...

Joe Popcorn is more like Joey Popcorn since even after 50 years, the movie business must obey what Sam Arkoff discovered about films:

AIP publicity department devised a strategy called "The Peter Pan Syndrome": a) a younger child will watch anything an older child will watch; b) an older child will not watch anything a younger child will watch; c) a girl will watch anything a boy will watch d) a boy will not watch anything a girl will watch; therefore-to catch your greatest audience you zero in on the 19-year old male.

Joe Popcorn (the elder) now would rather buy the Blu-ray to get the real theater experience on his 65 inch 1080p HDTV.

comment #34

Travis Crabtree says ...

What about Joe I Love Shitty Movies? Where does he fit in?

And did anyone answer the question, what is Delgo? Because, what is Delgo?

And the reason you losers didn't like "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever" is because you didn't see it in IMAX 3D.

comment #35

qwiggles says ...

Forget screenshot comparisons: this was doomed to look, smell, and act like a retread the moment Cameron hatched a white-foot-soldier-falls-in-love-with-native-life-and-landscape-and-fights-to-protect-its-majesty-going-native-in-the-process narrative. There are probably hundreds of these, and all of them look goofy, blue aliens or not. Some of them have the benefit of a Terrence Malick at the helm and others have Kevin Costner.

My biggest fear for Avatar is that Cameron is too smug to realize this is a pretty stock, mawkish story, and will oversell it as (to quote some of the more ridiculous Slumdog overpraise of last fall) a "buoyant hymn to life," not just in the marketing but in the film itself. Figure lots of slow-mo elves running to their falling comrades, etc. I'll be pleasantly surprised if he gets around this, but if he doesn't, I'm convinced that all the mindblowing 3D in the world won't rescue this 9th grade script idea.

comment #36

Gnome de Guerre says ...

Qwiggles: way to capture the real problem here. Bullseye. Here's to transcending cliche.

JohnnyM: Polarized glasses have been the norm for 3D projection since at least the late 90s (though sciencey Imax movies had them even earlier, as did Captain EO). Anyway, allow me to be the first to welcome you to the 21st century! Welcome friend! See our marvels! Healthcare reform! Blogs! Twitter! Iphone! All in glorious optically polarized 3D! Yes, the Iraq thing might be familiar to you from whenever it was you were frozen ('92 I reckon?), or maybe the Afghanistan thing might ring a few bells (it's the USA/NATO over there now by the way, not the Russkies), but other than that, I'm sure you're intrigued by our strange new world of Star Warsian movies, suicide bombers, and Michael Moore agit-prop. Right?

What? Same old same old you say?

Sigh.

comment #37

Rich S. says ...

I'm fairly certain that polarized 3D glasses have been the norm since the format first popped up in the 50s. The red/green glasses have been used for television presentations because a TV screen can't reproduce a polarized 3D image. 3D films like House of Wax and Dial M for Murder were in color/polarized 3D.

I know for a fact that polarized 3D was used during the return of 3D in the 80s- Jaws 3, etc.

The first time I saw well-done 3D was at Epcot in Florida in 1982, where the theater was specifically set up for it.

I think there have been experiments with some IMAX 3D films with radio-controlled glasses that control the polarization for maximum effect. But I haven't heard about anything like that lately.

comment #38

DeeZee says ...

JohnnyM: Sounds like the same argument where people who own Blu-Ray say that we have to watch the movies on HDTV to fully appreciate them.

Kane: Office Space is a hipster movie, not a Joe Popcorn movie.

comment #39

Tommy S says ...

I saw the entire movie yesterday, and enjoyed it thoroughly. I did watch it in 3d, but it would be good without it. The incredible imagery is why 3d is being touted so much, but it doesn't single handedly carry the film.

That being said, plot-wise, it's nearly identical to Fern Gully.