Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Off Topic: The Pollantir:
Are you going back to the 3D theater starting August 27th to see the extended Avatar?
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
Poll: Are you going back to the 3D theater starting August 27th to see the extended Avatar?
Yes
No
Maybe
Heck no
Can't wait
Only if it's playing near me-I won't drive far
View Results (39 votes)
 

Magpie
Immortal


Jul 24 2010, 12:49am

Post #26 of 39 (250 views)
Shortcut
thanks for the link [In reply to] Can't Post

I used the quote (provided in isolation from any other comments made at the same time) to find more info. You wrote: "According to James Cameron himself this version is being released because he thought the original didn't make enough money."

But I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying it didn't earn it's full potential (because it had to be pulled from IMAX theaters to honor commitments of screen time to other films). There's a difference between 'enough' (the term you used) and 'full potential'. During strawberry season, 'enough' strawberries may be a quart or two. But I want as many quarts as I can get. I won't steal or cheat or manipulate or knock anyone down to get them. But if I have the opportunity to get 10 quarts, I'm getting them. If going back in three days lets me get those ones that weren't ripe the first time, I'm going. I'm not saying I don't have enough. I've got enough. I want as much as I can get. Does that make me greedy? Perhaps. But I wager many of us would endeavor to get more than 'enough' of some item or other during our lifetime because... it's there for the getting and we desire it.

I just don't get the greedy vibe off Cameron. I can't believe I set myself up to defend him because he's not one of my favorite people. But I think he's got more integrity (such as it might be) then many people give him credit for (I've actually read quite a few interviews with him and I always enjoy what he has to say. If someone can capture my attention with their thoughts, they must have something going for them).

I don't doubt he is willing to make money. I don't doubt he is willing to make as much money as possible. But I do think he cares about his product (to some extent... there is a continuum on this) and I don't think wanting to earn money and being willing to work hard to do it is necessarily greedy. I'd have to have a bit more info to make that assertion. And I don't feel at all confident maintaining that 'he's not doing a director's cut for any artistic reasons.. he's only doing it for the money'.

(interestingly, I just listen to Spielberg talk about his motivations for making a director's cut for Close Encounters)

You seem to be fine with the concept of him releasing the same movie with no additions but somehow giving a few extra minutes to fans as a 'gift' doesn't sit so well with you. If I would go see Avatar again (and I would) without any extra minutes, why would I be unhappy if he gave me more? It feels to me like he's saying.. .hey, if you didn't get a chance to see it on the big screen last time... here you go. We're giving you another chance. If you did but want to see it again, well.. thanks for doing that. Here's a little something extra as thanks for your time, attention, and money.

No one that I knew thought that the extra footage in the LOTR EE movies was some sort of cop out. Lots of people didn't really balk at having to buy the LOTR movies again to get the behind the scenes footage in the LE versions (I did... but I bought them, anyhow). People even said (and I am not exaggerating): 'I would spend any amount of money to get any item that was LOTR related.'

But there seems to be this odd double standard with Avatar. Terms like greedy and money grubbing are pretty harsh. And when they're tossed around, they get applied to Cameron but they also reflect on the people who 'buy into' this supposed money grubbing and greediness. But then, the nuance of separating the issue from how we talk about the issue (with 'the issue' being one of any dozen or so issues) is one that few seem to grasp. I've surely stepped into it again with my attempt to tease the two things apart.

I am never surprised when I like things other people don't... or don't like things other people do. But I am a bit surprised when the emotions run so high towards one sentiment or another - especially when disparaging terms get employed in the expression of that high emotion.




Patty
Immortal


Jul 24 2010, 4:05pm

Post #27 of 39 (221 views)
Shortcut
From what I remember... [In reply to] Can't Post

it was still selling out in many IMAX 3D theaters and they were contractually obligated to take it out because some other IMAX movie was scheduled to come in. What is "too much money"? If they could have made more, I see nothing wrong with them bringing the movie back to the screen. More money for all who made the movie, not just Cameron and no one is forcing anybody to go see it again.

I love Altaira's use of the word "magical" for her Avatar experience. I didn't bond quite so well with the movie itself, but the theatrical experience was indeed magical. That's the difference between my watching the blu-ray (which is wonderfully mastered to the disc in such a way that there is a good deal of depth perception) and the inclusive, immersive experience of seeing that movie in 3D at the theater. That was an "event". Fans who want to go back to have that experience are not "suckers"--just fun-loving.


Patty
Immortal


Jul 24 2010, 4:08pm

Post #28 of 39 (206 views)
Shortcut
Oh, Magpie, I posted my last post before I read this... [In reply to] Can't Post

and I agree with you 100%.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Jul 24 2010, 5:06pm

Post #29 of 39 (253 views)
Shortcut
doh Clicked No before I saw Heck No [In reply to] Can't Post

add one to "Heck No" in final tally please!

Maybe 10 years from now I would see it again. Though sitting in an empty theatre for Apocalypse Now Redux was depressing -- and there was a lot more additional material than a few minutes worth.


Magpie
Immortal


Jul 27 2010, 2:04pm

Post #30 of 39 (192 views)
Shortcut
I am in sync with your theatrical experience [In reply to] Can't Post

There are many ways to enjoy movies but one that I hold dear is to sit in a large dark theater with a big screen (not IMAX... just bigger than my tv) with other people taking in and enjoying the movie (and hopefully not talking, rustling food bags, and checking their text messages).

I can watch just about everything I want on DVD. But I enjoy the theater experience. Avatar is not one of my top 10 favorite movies. But I did enjoy it enough and the more I watch it, the more I enjoy it. (and the more credit I can give Cameron for what he did accomplish, rather than only judging him on what he didn't).

I'm happy to have another chance to see it on the large screen.

(on an aside note, I often wonder how many people who are quick to judge creative work ever do any themselves. As someone whose creative endeavors can't come close to the massive works we get a chance to take in and judge... I can imagine many reasons why a work isn't perfect. All creators have to give up their work, at some point, and release it... perfect or not. And I don't suppose many - if any - of us ever achieve perfection. I would hate to hold up any of my stuff to the criticism people seem all to eager to dish out sometimes, never wanting to consider any larger picture. It's okay to critique and that is valuable for growth. But that's not what I see most of the time.)



Tim
Tol Eressea


Jul 28 2010, 6:18am

Post #31 of 39 (271 views)
Shortcut
Simplistic popular silliness [In reply to] Can't Post

If only the amount of thought that went into the technology of the movie made it into the script. I'm tired of the military always being made out as the bad guys in movies. I'm tired of corporations being made out as bad guys in movies. Indigenous peoples are not automatically saints or In Tune With Nature. It's like listening to the same note of music over and over again. Life isn't that simple. Things aren't that black and white. No extension is going to change this story enough - I've already seen Dances With Wolves.

*jumps off soapbox*


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Jul 28 2010, 2:07pm

Post #32 of 39 (344 views)
Shortcut
Science Fiction & Fantasy Reflect Reality; [In reply to] Can't Post

Corporations are made up by and of Humans but are not human. They may be bad but not "Bad Guys". The primary goal of today's huge capitalist corporation is the extraction and concentration of wealth. The manipulation of personal, local, national and global politics to support this goal is a constant and ongoing process. The use of force through the military is just part of this political support. This may be viewed as a good thing and probably is by those who benefit from the process. And it may be viewed as a good thing by those who believe the the commercials, the miss-information and propaganda that is constantly generated to support this global concentration of wealth. Or you might think the entire system is leading to a bad end for the vast majority.

Cammeron chose a simple metaphoric theme to reflect his criticism of the current Global Economic/Political situation. This is the great tradition of speculative fiction. It may not have been the best attempt at this but it sure got the message out to a lot of people.

And wasn't that 3-D really something!Evil


Tim
Tol Eressea


Jul 28 2010, 10:39pm

Post #33 of 39 (353 views)
Shortcut
Yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

... the 3D was really something.

But what you said (and it was well said) doesn't address my concern that it's too simplistic. And this dumb-ed - down message is being repeated over and over and over again.

One thing I neglected to mention previously I'll also add here. I was a member of the military. Hollywood's continued assassination of the character of the military grates my nerves.

What also puzzles me is this. I was watching the commentary for Aliens (a movie I love btw) and in this commentary Cameron apologized to his marine buddies for over-simplifying those Marine characters in the movie. Then he does the very exact same thing in Avatar.

Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky and have seen too many movies. But it's the soldiers that die and suffer who protect the freedom the film-makers have to create those movies.

I can't speak to this system you brought up except to say this - it's as old as the human race and it's never going to go away so long as humans group together in bunches to protect themselves or achieve goals.


WilliamJESnider
Bree


Aug 20 2010, 8:24pm

Post #34 of 39 (112 views)
Shortcut
I hated that movie enough the first time! [In reply to] Can't Post

Why on earth would I pay more money to see the same excessively long movie that I already saw, but longer? Only LOTR would I do that. Avatar is terrible. Unappealing characters, terrible plot, cliche' visual style, ridiculous and unrealistic even after the 'suspense of disbelief' kicked in, so boring, so pretentious, and so shockingly over-rated. No, no, nopety no.


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Aug 20 2010, 8:37pm

Post #35 of 39 (140 views)
Shortcut
What was cliché about the visual style? [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems like most of Avatar's success had to do with it's visual style and how new / well-done it was.
but maybe I'm thinking of "visual style" in a different way than you are.


WilliamJESnider
Bree


Aug 20 2010, 9:16pm

Post #36 of 39 (112 views)
Shortcut
Sure the CGI was impressive, but ... [In reply to] Can't Post

I apologize for being harsh, and little rude, but personally I wasn't impressed with the art direction. I found the creatures rather uncreative. I found the environments rather 'done before'. Personally I was just very disappointed all around. It all felt cheap and uncreative. I know lots of hard work went into it, but it somehow just isn't a labor of love, its a carefully thought out money-making scheme. It gives audiences what they want, rather than giving them something new, or challenging, or aesthetically original, or controversial such as Inception or LOTR. (both of which I love, by the way)


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Aug 20 2010, 9:55pm

Post #37 of 39 (100 views)
Shortcut
welcome to TORn by the way [In reply to] Can't Post

I can see what you mean. Though I enjoyed the movie, I wouldn't see it again if I had to pay in order to do so. Nine (or whatever the number was) extra minutes is certainly not worth paying the full theater + 3D charge. I can't really say if I think it was a labor of love or not, as I didn't pay especial attention to it's development, etc. and can't see into Cameron's heart, but it definitely seemed to make more money than I would judge appropriate for it's quality. It was a good movie in my mind, but by no means great.

It was nice of you to apologize by the way. It can be easy to get worked up, but you seem to have calmed down quite quickly. Smile

Again, welcome Smile


WilliamJESnider
Bree


Aug 20 2010, 10:13pm

Post #38 of 39 (164 views)
Shortcut
Thank you for your friendliness [In reply to] Can't Post

After only being on TORN one day I am already pleased to find that everyone here is extremely friendly and kind. Its really refreshing, I guess its just something in the nature of a Lord of the Rings fan to be kind and friendly. :)


the_argonath
Lorien


Aug 26 2010, 5:01pm

Post #39 of 39 (282 views)
Shortcut
Nope! [In reply to] Can't Post

I have the one-disk DVD version and that's enough for me Smile

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.