Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

gregegan.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 110 posts

Re: SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

#31

Post by anigbrowl »

nearestneighbor wrote: post #20

What puzzles me is why, with their $237e6 budget, they couldn't afford a decent script.

In a nutshell, the audience for nuanced, elaborately plotted scripts is not as big as that for epic hammy ones. The movie industry (qua theaters) is not really about movies so much as it is a marketing operation for comfy chairs, sugary drinks, and popcorn. Hence the big-budget movie emphasis on the 'wow' factor, best appreciated via a 75-foot screen.

To some extent, it's always been this way. Look at Shakespeare: most of his plays are set in foreign countries which would have been terribly exotic to his audience, or are concerned with battles, magic, or murder - it's all pretty sensationalist stuff.

With this sort of big-budget production story complexity takes a back seat to putting the audience 'into' the experience. Gattaca is a fine sci-fi movie that turns on a clever script and strong acting performances, but it wasn't exactly a box-office sensation. But it was pretty cheap to make. with something like Avatar you want a story that everyone can follow easily rather than one that risks alienating any segment of the audience. Epic stories generally try to minimize ambiguity and complexity: the payoff is emotional rather than intellectual.

Re: SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

#32

Post by ardit33 »

dylanz wrote: post #16

He recommends Princess Mononoke. It's that fact alone that makes me take his review into consideration. If you haven't seen Princess Mononoke, I'd highly recommend it. Actually, I'd recommend all the Studio Ghibli films. My wife and I have the entire collection, and are in the middle of watching the last one we haven't watched yet, Porco Rosso (which is so far, fantastic). "These" are the kinds of animations I, perso…

Thanks.

Gonna watch it tonight: http://www.veoh.com/collection/phanviet/watch/v6364398zH9eBN...

Re: SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

#33

Post by jacoblyles »

seldo wrote: post #2

Many of the reviews of Avatar have focused on the (over-)simplicity of the plot. I don't understand these people. Avatar is packed with so much visual confection that I could barely process half of what I was seeing; I wouldn't have had any brain left over to _understand_ a plot. Who cares about the plot? It's beautiful . Amazingly, wonderfully, brilliantly beautiful.

If you're reviewing a movie then the weakness of the plot is something valid to comment on. Plot is usually considered an important part of a movie. I was enthralled by the movie from beginning to end; my friend was squirming in his seat and commenting on how long it was. Different people like different things about movies.

Re: SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

#34

Post by plinkplonk »

seldo wrote: post #2

Many of the reviews of Avatar have focused on the (over-)simplicity of the plot. I don't understand these people. Avatar is packed with so much visual confection that I could barely process half of what I was seeing; I wouldn't have had any brain left over to _understand_ a plot. Who cares about the plot? It's beautiful . Amazingly, wonderfully, brilliantly beautiful.

"Who cares about the plot?"

I do. (Sorry for being ...uh .... different).

yes it looks cool. Some of us expectt more in a movie. Sorry about that.

I personally found the warmed over "Stupid White Man penetrates exotic closed society and rises to be leader of it, seducing the native woman" plot tiresome, repetitive and tedious, especially with the clunkiest dialogue I've heard in a decade, and insufficiently compensated for by the technology/visuals. I found the "noble savages" idea and infantile hippy politics and preaching tiresome too.

For some of us lesser mortals good graphics/special effects is just one element of a good Scifi/fantasy movie, and then not the most important aspect.

(from the review) " what it really felt like to me was a fourth movie in the Shrek franchise, pipping the yet-to-be-released Shrek Forever After to extrapolate that series' twin curves of rising technical achievement and plumetting wit to their logical endpoint: a near-immaculate feat of visualisation, accompanied by a staggeringly awful plot in which clunky genre conventions triumph completely over plausibility and originality. Avatar even boasts its very own love story where societal expectations and superficial barriers of size and pastelicity are overcome by generous helpings of pixie dust."

This expresses my feelings perfectly, but I wouldn't be so polite. I think Avatar is a terrible movie with gorgeous visuals and nothing else.

Aliens != Red Indians in fancy dress. The movie insults my intelligence on multiple levels. Yes I know, Caveat Emptor and all that, but I guess it must be because I am one of "these people"?

Re: SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

#36

Post by waterlesscloud »

anigbrowl wrote: post #31
nearestneighbor wrote: post #20

What puzzles me is why, with their $237e6 budget, they couldn't afford a decent script.

In a nutshell, the audience for nuanced, elaborately plotted scripts is not as big as that for epic hammy ones. The movie industry ( qua theaters) is not really about movies so much as it is a marketing operation for comfy chairs, sugary drinks, and popcorn. Hence the big-budget movie emphasis on the 'wow' factor, best appreciated via a 75-foot screen. To some extent, it's always been this way. Look at Shakespeare: m…

It's also true that if you're spending $300,000,000 making the movie, it's got to play everywhere. EVERYwhere. It's going to be translated into 50 languages, usually badly. It's going to play in villages where no one reads and no one speaks English and the sound system loses half the words anyway.

Simple works. Complex doesn't.

As foreign box office has grown to a higher and higher percentage, this has become more and more true. Avatar did over 2/3rd of it's global box office opening weekend outside of the US and Canada (the "domestic" market).

Cameron did his job.

Re: SF author Greg Egan reviews Avatar

#37

Post by blhack »

seldo wrote: post #2

Many of the reviews of Avatar have focused on the (over-)simplicity of the plot. I don't understand these people. Avatar is packed with so much visual confection that I could barely process half of what I was seeing; I wouldn't have had any brain left over to _understand_ a plot. Who cares about the plot? It's beautiful . Amazingly, wonderfully, brilliantly beautiful.

Who cares about the plot? It's beautiful. Amazingly, wonderfully, brilliantly beautiful.

There is a wonderfully realistic, fully immersive, 3D environment right outside my office window right now, but I don't care.

Want to know why?

Because the plot is boring. I get out of my chair, walk to my car, go to the gas-station, and then go home to play with my dog and go to bed.

The end.

People go to movies because it is better than reality. Perhaps those who never leave their couch are wowed by images that look exactly like reality, but Avatar's visual effects wowed me only in a "well, it looks like they finally did it properly!" sense. No offense to anyone who worked on this film, it is a staggering technical achievement, but it doesn't really do anything that reality doesn't.

/this might be due to my being a bit bitter that I can't see the 3D version due to my non-stereoscopic vision :(.

Post reply on HN