Page 1 of 1

Avatar

PostPosted: December 27th, 2009, 9:28 am
by moordarjeeling
I haven't seen Avatar, but from what I've heard, it sounds like Lewis was 60 years ahead of them.

Earthlings as bad guys colonizing an unfallen paradisal planet ... an earthling taking the side of the natives....

Hm, imagine Perelandra in 3-d. They wouldn't dare, not for theatres.

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: December 27th, 2009, 4:05 pm
by wondawomen
I must go back to see the 3D version. I loved the antiwar themes. I will read Perelandra next. I have started it a few times but got side tracked. Also riding the flying creatures and first having to fight them was a familiar theme from some other sci fi film. I loved the movie and so did the two other anti sci fi companions.

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 3rd, 2010, 2:36 pm
by teomiriam
so I watched Avatar last night and I really don't get what all the fuss is about, I was totally unimpressed--it wasn't a bad movie, but quite average, too Hollywood, too many clichés, and nothing new really ... those who have seen it and liked it, what did you like about it? (and don't get me wrong I love fantasy movies/ stories)

Unfallen Extrterrestrials?

PostPosted: January 3rd, 2010, 5:54 pm
by Kanakaberaka
I have not yet seen Avatar, but from the reviews I have read the giant blue natives appear to be nature worshiping pantheists. This was done supposedly to make the film appeal to a wide audience. I wonder if it could have been a bit more controversial if these jolly blue giants had been "unfallen", that is untouched by original sin. That's the way C.S. Lewis introduced his Malacandrans and Perelandrans. Would sinfull Earth humans be able to understand why beings on another planet could get along with one another while we can not?

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 10th, 2010, 8:05 pm
by moogdroog

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 10th, 2010, 8:46 pm
by teomiriam
Thank you! At least now I am not the only one who thinks that, I was feeling a bit weird (although not enough to change my opinion :) and was thinking if maybe I've missed something while watching it :)

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 10th, 2010, 10:12 pm
by moogdroog
Heh, I think we are certainly in the minority. I thought the visuals were good, but not as amazing as I'd been led to expect, and the storyline was very bland to me, with characters I didn't particularly care about (with the exception of the one Sigourney played, but only because I am a Ripley fangirl :lol: ). I'd take an interesting storyline - not necessarily uberoriginal, but at least one that wasn't hackneyed and predictable - over fancy graphics any day. Saying that, I think the film worked at a 'myth' level - very archetypal characters, strong message of individual and social honour, a fairytale world, which might account for its appeal. I can certainly see why it is well liked.

The best sci-fi things I have seen are things that have convincing special effects but also have interesting and believable (in the context of the sci-fi world) plots - like Firefly.

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 10th, 2010, 11:25 pm
by cyranorox
I liked it; the story is an old one, the broken man who finds himself in another world. But it's deeper, too: a retelling of the story of the Father and the Son, and The Spirit [Grace, natch]; here, the Son refuses to do a craven thing for the Father. And the self-serving school is Augustine school [!]. So it's an anti christian story on that level.
But the Cross was there, did you notice? the latina pilot who rebels wears one. And so the Cross is not with the business and military side, at all, And Grace is received by the Na'vi.

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 11th, 2010, 12:58 am
by Warrior 4 Jesus
I saw Avatar in 3D last night. I'm not convinced that 3D really adds much to the experience. There were several moments that took full advantage of the technology but most of the time it didn't do anything for me. I've got to say, for all the hype surrounding it, it was only quite good (and that's almost purely because of the impressive visuals). The imaginative fauna and flora were very cool (though I'm not sure why most animals needed an extra pair of limbs and the horse/zebra-like creatures didn't animate so well in a full gallop). The Na'vi were nicely animated and I enjoyed the ending battle and the strangeness of Pandora. The world was nicely realised. The story was beyond bland. It's not even that it has been done countless times, it's that no new perspective was brought to the story. The acting wasn't terrible but nor was it memorable. Sigoury Weaver didn't even make much of an impression. The music was decent at times but most of the time forgettable. Character development wasn't present, except for perhaps Jake and his Na'vi lover (she was probably the most interesting of the lot). I know people don't go to a James Cameron movie to expect quality dialogue and character depth BUT nor should we be happy with something so clichéd and for lack of a better word, 'soulless'.
I don't need great dialogue to enjoy a movie, I don't need great character development, nor much of a story to better enjoy a movie but I need more than just pretty visuals. I'm giving Avatar a 7/10.

Re: Avatar

PostPosted: January 19th, 2010, 8:05 pm
by Larry W.
I enjoyed Avatar too. The pro-environment and anti-war messages were well presented. Many people have mentioned to me that the conflicts in the story are so much like those between the Indians and the settlers during the settlement of our country. Some have said that the "sky people", as the natives of Pandora call them, represent corporate greed. They seem to want to do anything to possess the land and drive the natives out. What's also remarkable is the transformation of Jake, the soldier-veteran, as he gets to know the native people and wants to become part of their culture. The 3-D effects are amazing, but I thought the story was quite good-- even though it's been done before. If you haven't seen it, it's well worth going. :smile:

Larry W.