Avatar (same thread new title) - Page 74

Avatar is obviously fantasy sci-fi, not hard sci-fi. Nothing inherently wrong with that...

+50

Couldnt have said it better myself. My wife loses enjoyment on tv shows and movies as she sits there and says "that wouldnt (or couldnt) happen in real life" or "that character would have never done that in real life".

Geez, its a movie, kick back, suspend reality, and enjoy.

It's Official: 'Avatar' is the New King of the World

http://www.thewrap.com/article/its-o...ng-world-13478

'Avatar' Sinks 'Titanic' in Overseas Box Office

http://www.thehdroom.com/news/Avatar...seas_Mark/6245

Only Cameron can defeat Cameron

Are they also "phasing in and out of the space-time continuum"? I bet they are. That would explain everything. I suddenly get it now. This movie is genius, I tell you, GENIUS!!!"

+100 I find it surprising that some people in this thread get enjoyment out of ANY film.

Don't say that, or some will fly in to call us "mindless simpletons" who have really low standards and can't tie our own shoes

I still use velcro

Ha haa haa! I actually do. Most of my Lacoste shoes still use velcro

velcro is too hard for me.

crocs all the way brah

Nice!

I got it covered.

My sneakers have velcro, and when i dont want to wear socks, i just slip into Crocs.

True!!!

You have no imagination, which is lucky, b/c I would rather watch a movie made by Mr Cameron.... Oh wait, you don't make movies, that talent was reserved someone else.

See I don't get this. People want thought provoking movies, but only about some deep phylosophical message. Those same people don't want to devote a few neurons towards the science behind it. That has to be spelled out, for this film at least.


By the way, I've never worn Crocs, but I hear they're comfortable.

Wow. Arguing over the physics of Avatar.

Fellas, it's a fantasy movie. I wouldn't even call it sci-fi. None of it has to make any sense or be even remotely plausible.

More productive to not argue about the subjective issues. At least we can use some facts with physics when hypothesizing a theory

I think there's much more science than fantasy in this film. More than you're giving it credit for and more than most sci-fi films before it.

There is nothing factual to debate in this movie. It's all fantasy.

Wow! Ok...you stick with that.

Manned intergalactic space travel, floating mountains, Living planet, ten foot tall aliens......yeah, I will.

While there is always some fact mixed in with fantasy in a fantasy movie, to try and argue the plausibility of events in a world that may or may not even obey our laws of physics is entertaining, but no real conclusions could ever be drawn.

You didn't see it in 3D?

gary, i stand corrected.

saw the flick at the camera 7 pruneyard with its real d 4k projector, and
i have to agree it is better than the digital liemax with dual christie 2k projectors.

you were right about the sound. true surround sound without losing the kickass
bass. liemax's sound was good, but not as good as at that theater.

i also seemed to perceive more detail, and the 3d was better, stood out more
than when i saw it on liemax. a little subjective here, but i presume the better
light makes detail easier to see which helps make cameron's breathtaking 3d
fully observable.

real d with 4k projector is definitely best way to see this flick. just remember, most real d theaters don't have 4k projectors. need to search
them out before you go.

By your definition, there are really no sci-fi movies. 2001 is a fantasy because aliens put the monoliths on our planet and the moon. Dr. Michio Kaku, a world famous astrophysist, has said that that is the only plausible way to colonize and explore our galaxy in the foreseeable future.

My definition of sci fi is anything that is plausible. Wizards doing magic, fairies, etc. are fantasy. Aliens, space travel, new age technology, etc. are sci fi. You've got to draw the line somewhere, otherwise you'll delete an entire genre of film and literature.

I agree with plausibility being a requirement of sci-fi, but there are always plausible elements in any type of movie, that doesn't make it sci-fi. For me, a movie is sci-fi and not just fantasy, when the movie more or less revolves around the plausible scientific element or elements, and suspension of disbelief is not a requirement. I wouldn't put Avatar there. Avatar is more a fantasy movie than anything else with some sci-fi elements.

Ok lordcloud, please tell me the fantasy elements you're perceiving. The only absolute fantasy I see in the film are the Avatars themselves. Everything else has at least some scientific thought behind it. What do you think? You may say the floating mountains, but Cameron gave us a reason that may be plausible, and didn't say that some magical Na'vi put them there.

Some thoughts on floating mountains, unobtainium, and plausibility from a "Rocket Scientist" Actually, sort of a fun read...

http://josephshoer.com/blog/2010/01/...ars-in-avatar/

I believe Avatar is the perfect example of a Sci-Fi Fantasy. This is a mash-up of Sci-Fi and Fantasy genres.

Even the vessel they use to travel there looks plausible. Like they constructed trying to minimize the amount of materials they use. Important factor conusdering the state the planet is in.

No my point was definitly valid. It just reinforces your dislike for Avatar which you make in every single post on this thread.

You can suspend disbelief for the impossible when it suits you.

Hehe...

Well if that's the case then give them Gattaca 2, 3, 4, 5


Slip on boat shoes forever!