-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous Potential partner attributes | Obnoxiousness of the chipmunk previews Next »
Breakdown of Avatar costs
» 221 TPS Reports
Leave a Reply
-
Latest Comments
greyspot00 on Not Sure If I Should Try to Co… greyspot00 on Not Sure If I Should Try to Co… Poptart on Strange Facts About Our Feline… Somanynamestochoosef… on It’s the Only State They… Ldude893 on A Roller Coaster of Feels Dexaan on Strange Facts About Our Feline… Master of all that f… on Sorry I Didn’t Pick Up o… Master of all that f… on Not Sure If I Should Try to Co… guatemalan boy on The Sovereign Nation of F… OleJ on Not Sure If I Should Try to Co… moarqq on Not Sure If I Should Try to Co… alyssa on Sorry I Didn’t Pick Up o… alyssa on This Water Tastes Funny… alyssa on Not Sure If I Should Try to Co… Fenix on The Sovereign Nation of F… 
Cheezburger Company Blog
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
firstsies?
Woooo! Congratz!
everything james cameron did was totally original
http://www.collegehumor.com/picture:1931082
http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2009/12/10-possible-sources-of-avatar-in.html
I vote for a five scrolls- long argument about first. followed by twenty scrolls of me saying 1993.
Am I the only one who saw the Pocahontas(sp?) essay with a few words switched to fit Avatar?
i love it when people don’t understand the plot and mock it like this.
Because…the plot was truly mind-bending, right?
Dances with smurfs.. nuff said.
you stole my name. fracker.
and add another $200 mil for the marketing of this movie. Total cost was over $500 mil
Pocahontas in space?
Ferngully Trek
I would watch both of those
Personally I enjoyed the film, overdone plot notwithstanding. And Sam Worthington is sexy in a military haircut
Pocahontar?
This movie was written in 1993… nuff said’!
I just assumed the cost of the plot was the amount to rent Pocahontas on DVD
No, it wasn’t, and that’s exactly the point. The plot is a fairy tale. It’s classic tropes all the way through. It’s not new and exciting – Cameron leaves that to the visuals.
I love it when people are so blinded by special effects that they don’t recognize a retelling of Pocahontas when they see it.
I love it when people are so blinded by knit- picking they don’t recognize a story written in 1993 when they see it.
The story was written by life, decades ago…. and it’s rewritten over and over again….
Well, photocopies are cheap now, so the rest of the money can go to people crossing out historical names and replacing them with made-up space names.
To correct everyone up above, the plot would be most similar to “A Man Called Horse”, one of those painfully embarrassing stories in which a man is captured by natives, learns their culture, and eventually lives with them. It is most noted for a very patronising view of the natives, and is cited as one of the first stories portraying the natives in any positive light. This is like saying Harriet Beecher Stowe’s stereotypes of African Americans were revolutionary. Today, they would not be.
What I’m saying is that the plot of the “noble savage” against the evil capitalistic corporation is not a very original plot. Nor was it very originally carried out. So what if the plot was worked on since 1993? That would be like saying Twilight is a viable plot because there are more than 3000 pages of plot. Quantity does not equal quality, and the same could be applied to the quantity of time applied to a plot. The plot holes within the movie (especially if you start overthinking it) are massive. So. No. A plot manufactured in 1993 by a sci fi fanboy and reworked into oblivion does not mean a well-written plot (or an expensive one either – as someone said above, photocopying has become a very cheap enterprise).
My life story:
Spent a weekend watching Kurosawa movies then the American Westerns based on them.(Favorite:Seven Samurai then Magnificent Seven). Redo of a plot does not equal fail. See Shakespeare.
Redo of a plot does not necessarily equal win either.
So, by both of your arguments,
A redo of a plot = Absolutely nothing at all…
Sounds like a black hole. If Douglas Adams was still alive ( whatever diety there is, please, we beg of you. SEND HIM BACK! The world has no more funny.)He might write into the next HHGTTG book, that to time travel, you have to redo an old plot script, but with more aliens… sounds about right.
every single romantic comedy has the same plot.. they keep making money
Except copying Shakespeare is a bit better than copying a story with overt racist overtones, AND with no redeeming factor whatsoever except as a piece of historical purple prose to put in middle school textbooks.
Well it copies Fern Gully too, and that’s not racist. It’s got elements of numerous forbidden-love stories in it, not just Pocahontas.
There are an aweful lot of stories like that. The trouble is, looking at the story in terms of the old “civilized man joins tribe and learns their ways” story can be seen as either a sign of consistency with the past, or a trite retreading.
I think it’s not so much about people rationally evaluating the plot, but taking whether they enjoyed or disliked the movie, and using that to excuse or attack the plot. Just look at wrong’s comment “Just enjoy the movie and stop being a stupid prick.” Is that a rational evaluation of the plot? Similarly, my Dad said “I don’t see why you didn’t like the movie. Sure, the story was a little corney, but the plot was good” and I was like “What’s the difference?”
So no, the plot of the “noble savage” against the evil capitalistic corporation is not a very original plot. Nor was it very originally carried out. But the majority of people that argue for or against the Avatar plot aren’t thinking about it rationally anyway, so the movie’s actual merits don’t matter much.
People don’t learn about history anymore. so what is he retelling a story from our own history books. At least way people will pay attention
I never saw Pocahontas. I can’t recognize something I’ve never seen.
So, HA! I laugh in the face of your logic! HAHAHA!
Michael Bay the 2nd
Except better.
people understand the plot because it’s been done hundreds of times before.
150 bucks?? wow, that’s a lot of money…
You can buy a whole lotta paper to put your script.plot on for that amount of money!
It takes a lot of money to photocopy an ENTIRE Pocahontas script.
Even though the Pochohantas script was invented AFTEr the Avatar one…geez, guys…
The script may have been but the book had not. You are thinking only of the Disney movie which is not the first Pocahontas made by any means.
OMG i was JUST GOING TO WRITE THIS (Wow thats one hell of a expensive photocopy of Pocahontas script) xD good thing i used control+F first
And dont forget the crap type face.
The fact that they used some Papyrus-font made me so irrationally angry.
I have not even seen the movie and am never going to watch it until it has decent subtitle font.
I am not reading something I could of done in Microsoft Word!
I would love to hear what you think of foreign subtitled films.
The fact that you will avoid a movie just because of the font it is subtitled in proves you can’t rationally view a movie at all.
but I lieked avatar.
Hear hear.
I gave a 9 of 10. It was very good and so what if its a plot recycled. I go to movies for pure escapism and entertainment. No, I don’t want to be challenged and think about social issues or whatever. I get enough of that in real life. I want a movie to take me to another planet. That’d be just fine by me.
and ‘splosions, can’t forget the ‘splosions
Wow, terrible graph. The movie was incredible. This world is overrun with cynics.. especially this website.
I totally second you on that.
And I third. I think I may go see it again sometime this week.
It’s so real that we take it for granted! I thought the movie had a good storyline to go with the graphics.
At least they hand-painted TLK… I have, and always shall be assured that any movie made through CGI is flavorless and boring, and far too flashy to resemble anything in our universe. It’s a good thing it was supposed to be an alien world, because it’d never look anything like this one. Hand-drawn and painted animation is vastly superior by virtue of being a direct, hands-on application of a professional artist’s talent.
Not to mention humans have been drawing by hand for ten-thousand years at least. CGI has existed for… eh… 30 years? I don’t blame them for it looking like crap, but that doesn’t mean I’m impressed, either.
I think they wasted 1/4 of their budget on glow in the dark plants.
even if the plot wasnt recycled Pocahontas and it was just a coincidence, it was still a silly movie.
Totally agree
Agreed
Agreed. Amazing movie, great plot and script.
You, my friend, get an epic win award. No matter that the plot wasn’t completely original (90% of the movies today are recycled) it was a GOOD plot. And that’s what matter. I saw this movie 3 times. I like it. I want a velocidragon now.
Graph dude fails are proportions too.
150 for stealing from pocahontas? :X
That’s what I came here to say. He paid $150 to watch Pocahontas and take notes? No wonder he ripped Disney off, Disney ripped HIM off!
150 for writing it in 1993, BEFORE any of the movies people say it rips off of.
Dances with Wolves- 1990
Um, Pocahontas came out in 1995, which means the scrpit was written far before. They can’t do the voice overs or animation until the script is done
Disney still beat Cameron
Yeah… it doesn’t take two years to write a kids’ musical cartoon 90 minute film.
Pocahontas, Dances With Wolves, etc.
Or you can look at it as a mish-mosh of random racial stereotypes: The Noble Savage. The Magical Negro. shake to mix, and enjoy!
sure was pretty, though.
Don’t forget, The Great White Hero. “What these folks need is a HONKY to save the day!”
Don’t forget that it was written in 199freaking3!!!
Yeah, but it’s not like it was in the Disney cartoon movie musical 90 minutes. Also, that real life story could’ve inspired Avatar. What’s wrong with that? Jaws was inspired by a true story.
Yeah but Disney didn’t tell what really happened. At all. Not even close.
oh cmon, it’s a scene for scene remake of Fern Gulley.
Oh, come one, it was written in 1993.
Oh, come on, Dances with Wolves was released in 1990.
p.h., you are obsessed with the year 1993.
Oh, come one (??), Fern Gully came out in 1992.
Suck on that.
DANGIT. Well, maybe this was Cameron’s more serious take on a kids cartoon. No one ever complains that the apocalypse is so overused and cliche… like I’m supposed to believe that EVERY way the world could end results in a desert world…
preparationH?
Butthurt much?
P.H. stands for what I don’t feel like telling you because I caught crap for it back in late 2008.
The screenplay and performances held the movie back. The characters and plot were pressed out of a mold, not a whit of originality or flair on that front. Sam Worthington wasn’t that great either. I concede, a brilliant film, but not quite perfect, as it should have been. If you watch it and keep a close eye, the cracks start to show through.
not if its in 3D. 3D makes everything better.
Excpet Jaws, Spy Kids, Shrakboys and/ or Lavagirls, and everything else.
Guy to watch frame-by-frame and alert the editors that someone let a space-smurf nipple get loose: $10,000
Really? I looked for those the entire movie…
creator of graph = fail
similarities to other movies = irrelevant
Just how many movies have obscure similarities to other movies? Almost everything. Just enjoy the movie and stop being a stupid prick.
Your comment = fail.
And so is the movie.
Actually his comment is win. It’s the TL;DR of what I was going to say.
This movie lacked anything that I would call a great movie. It had no plot at all that was original. The acting was less than splendid. The special effects weren’t even mond blowing!
In a day in age where special effects come with the click of a few buttons, not the work of a true artist (as the world saw in such cinematographic movies as “Citizen Kane”, “Lawrence of Arabia”, or “Casablanca”), how can one truly say that the special effects were amazing? In my opinion, the 3D only detracted from the movie (the glasses give me a headache).
Why do people love this movie so? Do tell what makes this movie so very special. I have heard from so many that it was fantastic, yet still have not heard a positive qualification for its so-called “masterpiece”.
You seem to have ignored the fact that barely anything is original anymore. The last truly original thing I saw was The Matrix.
And if you even read anything about the advances in CGI used to make this film, you would be amazed. But I doubt you will do anything other than sit around and pout about it.
You’d like Grran Torino. Also, realize that Avatar was written in1993, before all the movies that now make it cliche-ariffic.
1993
1993
1993
1993
1993
1993
1993
1993
1993
1993
Call Me Joe (1957) is a science fiction story by Poul Anderson about an attempt to explore the surface of the planet Jupiter using remotely controlled artificial life-forms. It focuses on the feelings of the disabled man who operates the artificial body.
Not all, but it’s close enough for it to be possible that the scriptwriter didn’t know about a few….
I’ve been wanting to see Gran Torino for awhile.
er, actually, the matrix was based off of total recall… it wasn’t really that original at all.
I haven’t seen Total Recall…. well, I guess there really hasn’t been much originality in Hollywood for awhile.
The Matrix = original?
*sigh*
I hadn’t seen the things it was a rip-off of…. just goes to show that everything has basically already been done….
Actually, the Matrix is almost a direct scene for scene ripoff of Ghost in the Shell. They altered a small portion of the plot, made it live action instead of animated, and made million based off the fact that most American’s wouldn’t know what they stole.
I was going to post this, but you beat me to it. There was a video on youtube that compared scenes from both movies.
Was Ghost in the Shell even released in America? I’ve never heard of it….
if you thin the matrix was original you should read satre (existential philosipher, 1920s), watch metropolis (fritz lang, 1930s), and read white noise (gibson, 1980s) and probably millions of others. the matrix was just another bad hollywood sci-fi xerox. and as for avatar? don’t get me started – beautiful but stupid.
You’re old, so you don’t count.
If you really think that the graphics involved in this movie just “come with the click of a few buttons”, then you are truly out of touch with the artistry and work involved.
Do a little research and try to use your computer for more than checking email and you’ll soon realize that it’s not as easy as punching a few buttons on the Moviemaker 3000HD-XL.
I know! It took Michael Bay two months to get every C.G.I. Transformer on screen for a few seconds!
obscure similarities = entire plot and almost all characters
Bonus points for the most misleading graph ever.
The plot for this movie was pretty unoriginal, but then again a lot of other movies are the same. One reason it’s so obvious that this plot is familiar is because the movies with the same plotline are well known and popular. How many post-apocalyptic war-torn desert movies are out there?
This plot was original back in 1993, when it was written.
It doesn’t change the fact that the plot is cheap and predictable.
Call Me Joe (1957)
Dances with wolves (1990)
Wow, two movies… I’m convinced… no one ever complains that The Dark Knight is Spiderman 3 with Christian Bale.
Because it’s not.
Three villains… all tied together through the hero’s ‘normal’ identity… big city and camera work to show it off…
The Joker isn’t tied in to Bruce Wayne’s identity. He’s only connected to Batman.
Wow, one out of three villains…
Also, everyone complained about the development of hte villains in Spiderman 3, but NO one complained that the only villain in Dark Knight that had any buildup was the one that didn’t need decelopment?
Not just one out of three villains…the MAIN villain out of three villians. In my opinion, one of the biggest problems with Spiderman 3 was that the movie focused equally on each of the villains, which meant that none of them was really fully developed. In the Dark Knight, I think the Joker is the main villian that the movie mostly focuses on, and then there are other minor villains. That’s what makes it better than Spiderman 3, at least to me.
I’m getting tired of people saying how awful the plot was. I’ll admit, the plot is well known, and sometimes overused, but this is a completely new story. Also, from an analytical standpoint, I could tell there was significant thought put into the script. I noticed several motifs, especially dreams vs. the real world, and natural vs. artificial. It was a very impressive script in my opinion.
It was even written in 1993, making it as original as it could’ve been at the time.
do us all a favor and shoot yourself in the face.
Actually, if you could have done it in 1993, that might have been more helpful.
Yeah, but I couldn’t lift a gun at negative two years old.
Do YOURself a favor and contribute to the argument, rather than telling me to kill myself.
kill yourself
HA!
^Sarcasm.
Ha! Nihilism.
There are more people here who dislike the movie than people who like it, so it seems nobody cares what the people who liked it have to say. Speaking for myself, at least, there’s nothing anyone could say in favor of a too-long movie with a cliché plot, that depends almost entirely on special effects, that would make me want to see it.
Yeah, that explains the fact that it surpassed Titanic as the highest grossing movie ever… oh wait, no it doesn’t…
Cliche plot? All I have to say is that it was written in 1993, before it was cliche.
Too long? Yeah, sci- fis are known for not being 90 minute bullcrap.
Special effects? So did the original King Kong.
So you haven’t actually seen the movie then?
Everyone I know who has seen it has hated it. If enough people hate a movie, I figure it’s bad enough that I don’t feel the need to waste $9 to see it for myself. If anything I’ll wait until it comes out on DVD, get it from the library for free, and see if it’s any good, so if it’s not, I can just stop watching it. By your logic, do you pay to see EVERY movie at the movie theater because they MIGHT be good?
It’d be better in thaters because otherwise, the visual effect would be all but lost and the plot will only jump at you, making the movie horrible outside of theaters.
I don’t see the point of making a movie that’s only good in theaters. Although I’m sure the people who really love the movie will buy it on DVD anyway.
I felt the same way about the latest King Kong. I saw it in theaters, and the main draw of it was how big and dramatic everything was on the theater screen. But on a TV screen, I didn’t think it was very good.
OH MY GOD THE SCRIPT WAS WRITTEN IN 1993, BEFORE FERNGULLY, POCHOHANTAS, AND maybe DANCES WITH WOLVES.
Dances with Wolves was released in 1990.
Dances with Wolves – Premiered 19th October 1990
Ferngully – Premered 10th April 1992
Though Pocahontas was released in 1995, taken from the IMDB – ‘The complex color schemes, angular shapes and facial expressions meant that the film was in production for 5 years.’ So Pocahontas was written in 1990.
Fail.
I’m sure Cameron had the idea for Avatar beofre Ferngully came out.. although he probably let it influence him a little (LOT) too much.
Also, Pochohantas is a Disney, musical, based off of a true story, cartoon. I doubt production took more than two years. Drawing faces… there are books that teach kids how to draw Pochohantas characters in a few minutes.
You clearly have no idea how difficult it is to produce a full length film using 2D animation.
Do you realize that for a single second of film, you need about 24 frames? And in 2D movies, each one of these frames must be hand-drawn? That means 1,440 frames need to be drawn for a single minute of film. Multiple that by 90 minutes, and you end up with over a quarter of a millions frames (129,600 to be exact). ALL done by hand.
Backgrounds, midgrounds, foregrounds, characters, coloration…all these (and more) must be done over and over and over again and done consistently. It takes patience. It takes talent.
It’s a lot more complicated than “drawing faces,” something a person obviously raised on today’s CGI dribble wouldn’t understand.
The 1993 argument is getting old. Just because it was original in 1993 doesn’t mean it is now. And, because it was released now, not in 1993, it is something it can be criticized for. Cameron could have made changes to it in that time, but he chose not to, and therefore can be criticized for it. The movie did have a classic, overused plot and George Lucas quality dialogue. However, it was a feast for the eyes.
AVATAR is awesome.
even though you can see the obvious similarities between it and pochahontas, as p.h. has said many times, it was written in 1993.
Before pochahontas.
So it used the same plot as the whole whites vs natives. The Native Americans and Colonial Americans are a huge deal in our society, the way we unfairly kicked them out of our land just for personal wealth and control. This movie truly helps relate the injustice we did to them from an outside, subjective source by placing the native americans as aliens and the whites as a different government 100 or so years into the future. It helped me and many others, for the first time realize how horrible we are for conquering their land.
So Dances with Wolves also featured the whole Native American theme. There are at least 20 movies about the Vietnam war, yet you don’t call all of them unoriginal for copying the plot of another movie?
One of the main themes of the historical event of us kicking out the Native Americans is that we befriended them and consequently betrayed them to get them to move. Don’t tell me its stealing the plot of other movies. Its relaying history.
And to all of those dissing the special effects, I have news for you. Do you have any idea how long CGI of this detail takes to make? Lets just say theres a reason the movie was released more than 15 years after it was written. The technology was revolutionary, especially the new form of 3D experienced in this movie and how it helped make the Na’Vi seem like real people, not computer generated blue things with no feelings. This movie is the future of all movies to come.
THERE IS A REASON THAT THIS MOVIE WAS SELECTED AS BEST DRAMA IN THE GOLDEN GLOBES AND IS NOW ONE OF THE HIGHEST (highest ever?) GROSSING MOVIES OF ALL TIME.
actually it’s 3rd highest grossing. Under Titanic and Dark Knight. But yeah – and it was a seriously good movie, people need to pick on something else now.
No they don’t. They still need to recover their steam from picking on Twilight, the Jonas Brothers, and Miley Cyrus. Avatar is a good distraction.
BUT WHHHHYYY??!!! Avatar was good! Unlike that other crap. It at least had awesome CGI. I am a shameless *oohh look at the pretty colours* kind of person. So is 99% of the rest of the world. We are all idiots, which is exactly how the Government wants us… Twilight, Jonas, Miley dont have tons of CGI (if they did, they could fix Bella’s wooden acting. or maybe not. We shouldnt expect miracles.)
Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t mind the fact that a movie has a wooden plot. It’s not the plot that makes a movie good, it’s all the stuff surrounding it.
Also I admit to being a “Ooooh~! Lookit the pretty colors!” person too.
Avatar was a legitimately good movie, I suppose the more sensible among us just have to wait until some celebrity does something stupid again. Where’s Kanye West when you need him?
He’s busy pissing off everyone around him.
Best drama?
I think I need something incredibly strong to drown in and delude myself that the human is still a viable species.
well considering it was voted best drama you are the only avatar hater out ther xD
Read the rest of the comments, dude.
I’ve never seen Pochahontas
GOOD. Avatr is that movie, only less suckish. And, you know, written before it…
does anyone know when the script was written? anyone?
i think like… 2002 or something… I dunno.
A week ago last Tuesday.
I know the flag was Belgian.
Don’t make me hurt you.
1993.
TOOOOO SOOOOOOON
I love how you guys rave about the special effects, and then bash the graph for telling exactly what you guys are saying. Indeed, you say things to the effect of:
a) So what if the plot isn’t original? The CGI was amazing!
b)So what if the plot was like pocahantas? You guys are just cynical!
c) The plot was great!
As for c, I’ll try to withhold my own scathing opinion of the plot. But as for the other two, the special effects indeed are special, shiny, sparkly, and everything you would want in CGI. This is why they cost so freaking much. This is the point the graph tries to make, and it illustrates it remarkably well for a hyperbolic graph (as all graphs on Graphjam are).
So think before you post up your comment being all butthurt over this graph, and try not to make an argument that actually supports the graph.
Oh, and do not forget the last resort:
d) You mock/criticize the plot because you DON’T UNDERSTAND it.
Pathetic much? I believe so.
i think it’s a little ridiculous to think that anyone who doesn’t love something you do simply doesn’t understand it. “you hate nickelback? it’s simply because you can’t grasp the full depth of their music!”
Where do I begin…?
a) The plot was original when it was written. Two or three movies used the idea, but that’s two or three movies.
b) See above.
c) It was when it was written… and, you know..NOW.
The plot was not original when it was written, and yes, I realize that it was written in 1993. It has been a cliché since long before that.
Yes, it wasn’t original, but it wasn’t cliche. I don’t know why people even want plot… it’s about aliens sexing humans that look like aliens…just watch it and shut up…
Just because you watched it and liked it doesn’t mean that everyone has to watch it. Seriously, grow up already.
Where are then:
- cost of hiring Sigourney Weaver
- costs of hiring other actors
- cost of marketing
Very dumb graph, very first one to make me such comment.
The plot may was simple and even dumb, but direction of such plot was great.
Avatards are lol.
When TPS reports per hour reaches 50, can’t they be renamed as “Whines” instead, because srs bsns happens in thread.
“Avatards” are fans of the show “Avatar: The Last Airbender”. So fans of this movie are going to have to come up with their own name.
James Cameron’s Avatards.
Oh snap….!
The plot was kept simple so that you could enjoy the awesome visuals. I mean seriously did you see it? It looked f***in awesome!
Besides, how much does it cost to write something down anyway?!
Wow. Apparently they got the entire cast and crew (except for Weta Digital) to work for free. That was awfully nice of them.
Cool… Sam Worthington’s prosthetics, Sigourney Weaver’s ciggarettes (they cost alot now, plus multiple takes), the…nerdy guy’s…gun, the clothes, the villain’s makeup, the hot chiks sunglasses…
I have to agree with chris. The plot was kept simple so the audience could enjoy the visual effects and not have to think to themselves what is going to happen next in the story.
I for one, thought Avatar was a kick@ss movie and is going to revolutionize future movies…
CGI wise, anyway
So typical for consumer society, isn’t it? Not having to think.
It’s an alien movie, what do you want, the meaning of life?
Yeah. Damn those people who overthink movies and find plotholes in them! They ruin movies for other people! Their opinions can’t be heard! Drown them out with mindless praise for the movie!
I jest, of course ;D
OR WE CAN DROWN YOU OUT WITH MINDFULL HATE OF THE MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did you like Pocahontas? Because, they were preety much the same plot, as mentioned about 5000x above. So, in a society where every original movie that comes out is almost instantly redone about 100x, of which a rare few DO get praised, despite the copying plot, why are we all picking on Avatar? Sure, the plot was mind-numbingly familiar. So are alot of other movies *coughTwilightcough* They still get their dues, and arent torn to shred by us, the definitive online community. (seriously. We as LOLcommenters represent EVERYONE. I have read comments from all walks of life and political views here. Except Inuit, funnily enuf)
im just saying. We are being hypocritical. Tons of movies are copied storylines, yet are praised nonetheless (the whole disney franchise is a copy) but Avatar, because it was with CGI that was mind boggingly good, gets targeted. I want a velocidragon.
What the heck is up with this audience not thinking crap? That’s the Micheal Bay school of thought.
Does that movie even have a plot? and i hate how they stole the halo vehicles.
I’m positive that Halo came out after 1993. Then again, the Halo books…
oh come on now, this isnt true. it cost more than 150 bucks to buy the pocahontas script from disney!
Yeah… even though Pochohantas was written after Avatar was…
If the script of Avatar was written so many years before it was actually turned into a movie, what makes you so sure that the same isn’t true of Pocahontas?
Well, that means neither script was aware of the other. Also, Cameron was waiting for the C.G.I. to get better.
Why is it that if humans were to do the same exact thing our blue aliens did, (refuse to help anyone and be jerks), we would be called jackasses? But if aliens do it, it’s alright?
Because they have USB cable hair.
okay, yeah the plot is like pocahontas, but there are only a few stories to be told in the world. my old english teacher told me that. i think it was seven original story ideas and everything after that is one of those seven. shakespeare wasnt the first one to do a “romeo and juliet” story. so, chill. its a story line that i very much enjoyed, and its not exactly like pocahontas
A predecessor to R&J was Troilus & Criseyde; Geoffrey Chaucer wrote it in the late 1300s. There was probably a template for the story-pattern even before that, too.
I liked “Avatar” better when it had Robin Williams in it and was called “FERN GULLY.”
Seriously, the “military as testosterone-driven stooges of the corporate-government oligarchy” cliche is OLD. It was OLD even BEFORE the US government started taking over the industries, in 2008.
And it’s also a hippie cliche – not even remotely true. The military, esp. in the US, is the executor of policy, not the maker of it.
Where “Avatar” is reall derivative? Not “Pocahontas.” Try instead “Everything ELSE Cameron has ever done.” It takes its plot from ‘Dances with Wolves’. It’s military tech is straight out of ‘Aliens’. There’s a love story that would make ‘Titanic’ proud. Michelle Rodriguez’s character? SO much like Jenette Goldstein’s character in ‘Aliens!’ Sigourney Weaver… acts close to Ripley, again.
It was pretty NEW in the early 90′s, when Ferngully AND Avatar were written.
No one complains that every apocalypse movie turns the Earth into a desert…
I complain that every post-apocalypse story has dudes with shoulder armor over one shoulder but not the other.
Yeah. Why can’t the chicks wear one bra cup?
Fern Gully was nothing like avatar asshole
I see my previous comment was never posted. Thanks Moderators. Anyway . . . .
So many people on here are making such a big deal of how Avatar was written in 1993. Are you trying to say that Cameron wrote it in ’93, and NEVER touched the script again? No re-writes, edits, etc.? I guess the development of the VFX technology took precedence over story.
He pretty much waited for the technology… after he finished the script in 1993…. Even so, would you scrap your biggest project because of a few cartoons?
I would not scrap my biggest project for a few cartoons, but I also would not spend fifteen years developing awesome VFX technology for a mediocre script. I would want to give my audience, the nice people who are paying lots of money to see my film, the best possible movie.
Audible sigh…
It’s a movie. About aliens. Having sex. With people.
If you want the meaning of life, you’re not gonna get it.
Yup, good CGI is expensive.
Now time for the 1993 REMIXED!!!
NininininiNINETEENNINETEENNinininiNIETEENninetyTHREEnineteyTHREE…
Here’s the numeric version for foreign fans.
11111919111199393…
Seriously, do you have nothing better to do? I’ve never seen a troll stick around this long before.
As a copy editor and media specialist (a job that involves me being at least proficient in most Adobe programs, knowing a little about web coding, a little about film, photography, special effects, etc.) I found the plot to be a little predictable. With names for things like “unobtainium” and several of the others, it made me wonder.
That said, I thought the special effects were amazing. I’ve done special effects (I’m not particularly good at it, I just know what needs to be done by the company experts) and I can say that it isn’t easy. The amount of time that CGI was worked on was simply amazing.
I went to see this for the sole fact that it inspired the design artist in me. It’s a movie worth seeing, and while the plot may be relatively simplistic in nature, the complexities of the Special effects making it difficult to sometimes see where the live action ends and the special effects begin are remarkable.
“…. the live action ends and the special effects begin are remarkable.”
That is the one thing that impressed me about Avatar.
One word: “Unobtainium.” (Seriously? That’s the best they could come up with?)
It’s not the best name but then again, I suggest you actually look at that periodic table in your chemistry book. Elements have stupid or unoriginal names Einsteinium, Californium, and Ununquadium to name a few. Scientists are not the most creative bunch, and I could totally see one thinking himself hilarious while naming a new element Unobtainium. What do you want, Ununpentium?
Pleasedon’tknitpickusium
for the love of Eywa, stop shi77ing on Awesome just because you will never be even a blip on my awesome-dar after this. ninja’s are meh compared to avatar. a Na’vi ate chuck norris’s brains after he kicked them in the ankle
wat
I would have put at least 40% on cost of the color blue, if you could quantify it.
What I want to know is, how do they expect us to believe that piracy is having any significant effect on the industry” when every year, more and more expensive movies are being made?
If they can afford ~$500 million for one film, it makes me wonder if they would really miss my $15-$20 if I were to copy a DVD.
So you think theft is okay as long as you steal from people with money? That makes no sense. That’s like only stealing homework from kids who didn’t copy it.
Seriously, the makers earned that money, and if stealing it wasn’t a big deal, the movie industry would be dead and there would be no DVD’s to pirate.
You douchebag theif.
So you’re saying it resembles…white men interacting with Native Americans? Wow, that sounds a lot like Pocahontas!
Except Pochohantas…and Ferngully…both follow the native female, not the settler male… and I don’t think either of those movies have as many minor characters as Avatr…oh, and their ******* ANIMATED!
Apparently James had a incredibly elaborate plot worked out, but Executive meddling forced him to boil things down to fit within the timeframe of the movie.
You miss the actors.
I’m amazed at how many people are saying that the movie’s visuals eliminate the need to think.
It’s a movie about aliens.
If you want to think, you’re in the wrong theater. This movie is entertainment, nothing more.
Go see Gran Torino or Diner if you want an intellectual movie. Or, you know, read a ******* book.
If you want visual entertainment (which, need I remind you, movies were invented for), then pay 10 bucks to see Avatar.
There is a tradeoff between intellectuality and fun in movies. You can’t have too much of either.
The closest I can think that had both is probably Star Wars.
But Avatar isn’t fun or intellectual. It’s a boring movie with a stupid plot.
Dude… its a really good movie. sure the plot is not THE best but what script is?
Plot=/=script.
Not that the script was that great, anyway.
actually dances with wolves is 15$ and pocahontas is 10$ so…
I really liked it. The plot wasn’t original, the characterizations were overblown, and THE FRICKIN 2-D SNAPSHOTS ON THE FRIDGE WERE IN 3D FOR SOME UNKNOWN REASON! but I liked it anyway. It was a spectacle. A beautiful spectacle. And the leads weren’t bad actors. And the dialog (most of it) didn’t make me cringe. I’d watch it again. It was worth the ten bucks.
Did you have a point somewhere in there?
What’s the point of having fabulous, overworked, astonishing 3D effects when you have a crappy plot? I mean if I really want to watch an FX Porn, Demoscene is always there.
it might be true but Avatar is still an awesome movie
I want an AMP suit, a Samson, and all the Na’vi killed. I will then have made
Avatar 2: 5X As Much Awesome Human Crap.
Finally somebody else see’s it…
This is why Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings are so much better.
ok avatar was kinda been there done that but it was preeety and in 3d…seriously !!!! i don’t here ne one comparing Step it up to…well any other dance movie…Y…cuz noone saw it