241 réponses à ce sujet

[JKoopman]

cruc1al wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

You're applying real-life principles to a piece of fantasy cinema.

Exactly. You also need to apply real-life principles if you wish to say it doesn't make sense that Eywa simply created the Na'vi. Which is why I said that option doesn't make any less sense than Na'vi evolving to be so similar to humans.

Wrong. I'm applying principles and facts of the film itself. The aforementioned bones, tools, jewelry, cloths and fabrics would indicate a race that couldn't simply have sprung up out of the ground overnight as soon as the humans landed unless your explanation is apparently magik.

[2pac Shakur]

cruc1al wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

Then how do you explain that such a human-like species evolved on another planet independently? Magic? Seems equally unreasonable to me.

And here we are on a Mass Effect forum discussing unreasonabilities of human-like species evolving on another planet.

First we were discussing the unreasonabilities of a human-like species being created on the spot by a planetary super-organism...

while we're at it, lets also discuss the unreasonabilities of elves, dwarves, orcs, magic, interdimensional warp gates, girl gamers, hot lesbians, sentient apes and reptiles, robotic super soldiers, faster than light starships, laser swords, gravity manipulating super powers, giant squid gods, and pretty much every piece of fiction ever created

no sh*t, it's fantasy, does it really need explaining? It may be even possible one day with advanced technology and theory, but hell it looks cool. Do we really need to ruin our imaginations by stating the obvious?

[cruc1al]

I absolutely agree with you there, 2pac shakur. No point in discussing it, really.



JKoopman, you're right, the idea that Eywa didn't just create the Na'vi is more internally consistent, but it still doesn't make the "creation" idea unreasonable IMO.

[Nerevar-as]

Avatar is not trying to be hard SF (to me it almost seemed an update of the planetary pulp novels from the ´30s), just does not ask for as much suspense of disbelief as ST or SW do. It is something Cameron usually does within the limits of his SF movies.

Eywa seems to be something to be explored in the sequels, some of Weaver´s dialogs hinted that way. What I find interesting is how it seem st limit the way Na´vi can develop their society. Attempts at industrialization, even controlled, would probably end in another Eywa zarg rush. Wonder if that was intended or Cameron missed it.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 02 juin 2010 - 11:14 .

[2pac Shakur]

Avatar 2:



The humans come back with a force of mobile suits and burns down Eywa

[Nerevar-as]

2pac Shakur wrote...

Avatar 2:

The humans come back with a force of mobile suits and burns down Eywa

Too obvious, and it would be a 15 minutes long movie. Shortest sequel ever.

[cruc1al]

Nerevar-as wrote...

2pac Shakur wrote...

Avatar 2:

The humans come back with a force of mobile suits and burns down Eywa

Too obvious, and it would be a 15 minutes long movie. Shortest sequel ever.

That's just the intro. It skips to "2 years later..." and shows some of the ashes from the burnt down forest starting to grow trees, then the ecosystem replenishes, then Eywa zarg rushes humans off the planet again. It will be called "Avatar 2: The Ecosystem Strikes Back"

[2pac Shakur]

cruc1al wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

2pac Shakur wrote...

Avatar 2:

The humans come back with a force of mobile suits and burns down Eywa

Too obvious, and it would be a 15 minutes long movie. Shortest sequel ever.

That's just the intro. It skips to "2 years later..." and shows some of the ashes from the burnt down forest starting to grow trees, then the ecosystem replenishes, then Eywa zarg rushes humans off the planet again. It will be called "Avatar 2: The Ecosystem Strikes Back"

ffff-----------------

and its called zerg btw (the koreans also call it jerg)

[JKoopman]

2pac Shakur wrote...

Avatar 2:

The humans come back with a force of mobile suits and burns down Eywa

I'd pay to see that.

Don't get me wrong. I love nature. But the sheer volume of hippie bs in Avatar had me rooting for the humans by the end.

[2pac Shakur]

the robotic walkers in combat actually looked pretty cool



I loved it when the mechs teared up the hippies

[GothamLord]

Can Unobtainium (I cant believe they actually used that as the element name) handle them bombing the planet from orbit?? Screw all this fighting with ships against flying blue hippies on dinosaurs. Just nuke the planet from space and come mine it later after the dust settles.

[2pac Shakur]

radiation and nuklear winter



bad for miners health

[GothamLord]

2pac Shakur wrote...

radiation and nuklear winter

bad for miners health

Wasnt that giant tree cutter remote controled??   We have Avatar technology.   We actually even need live miners??? 

[JaegerBane]

JKoopman wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

Not the most unpredictable film, I'll give you that. But trying to claim a film like Avatar is 'crap' when it's the most profitable and most technically accomplished film of all time is a bit like trying to claim black is white. All it does is make you look a bit silly.

A box office success =/= a good film. If we're to believe otherwise, then Michael Bay is the greatest director of our generation.

Flashy CG and lots of pretty explosions may lure the average American troglodyte into theaters, but a revolutionary piece of film-making it is not.

Am I perhaps undeservingly harsh on Avatar? Maybe. But for the same reason that I hate on Megan Fox; because she's mediocre at best and yet hailed as some sort of sexual goddess, just as Avatar is a mediocre film that for some reason is constantly hailed as the greatest piece of cinema since the invention of the moving picture.

I didn't say it was an amazing film or anything - I'm simply pointing out that to baggage up the whole thing as a 'crap film' simply because it's storyline has been done before and it managed to do everything else pretty well is, as I said, little more than bias. It's not like it's storyline is actually 'bad', it's acting wasn't terrible and it's pacing wasn't horrible either. It is no doubt an overrated film, but any sensible definition of the film would not bill it as 'crap' any more than you'd rate stuff like Star Wars as crap. 

Your own comment that it'll appeal to 'American troglodytes' doesn't really imply that you're actually open to discussion on this, so I'm not going to waste my breath any further.

[JaegerBane]

GothamLord wrote...

Can Unobtainium (I cant believe they actually used that as the element name) handle them bombing the planet from orbit?? Screw all this fighting with ships against flying blue hippies on dinosaurs. Just nuke the planet from space and come mine it later after the dust settles.

As far as I remember, there's a treaty which forbids the RDA from fielding nukes in space. The whole reason they had that Dragon gunship was due to the fact it was the most powerful non-nuclear force the human race could field - the next best thing, in other words.

[JaegerBane]

cruc1al wrote...

I absolutely agree with you there, 2pac shakur. No point in discussing it, really.

JKoopman, you're right, the idea that Eywa didn't just create the Na'vi is more internally consistent, but it still doesn't make the "creation" idea unreasonable IMO.

In fiction, internal consistency is what defines whether something is unreasonable. That's what makes the idea of the Reapers being quasi-cyborgs by way of genetic material reduction tech 'reasonable', but the idea that thy're actually giant space hamsters who survived in Dark Space thanks to regular visits to McDonalds is a load of poop.

[Massadonious1]

I think Morgan Spurlock already disproved that.

[Nerevar-as]

JaegerBane wrote...

GothamLord wrote...

Can Unobtainium (I cant believe they actually used that as the element name) handle them bombing the planet from orbit?? Screw all this fighting with ships against flying blue hippies on dinosaurs. Just nuke the planet from space and come mine it later after the dust settles.

As far as I remember, there's a treaty which forbids the RDA from fielding nukes in space. The whole reason they had that Dragon gunship was due to the fact it was the most powerful non-nuclear force the human race could field - the next best thing, in other words.

They tried to name a planet Xena IRL, so yeah, I can believe Unobtainium, which is likely a joke in universe. Nuking could also damage the mineral, and besides the goal of the humans was driving the Na´vi away, not genocide. PR nightmare killing everyone to take something from them (wonder if they tried telling them why they needed the Unobthing, not that it would have worked - don´t think the Na´vi as hippies but they can be quite the jerks).

About ME film, Cameron would probably be the only guy to cast Shep as female (and Virmire Kaidan).

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 03 juin 2010 - 01:29 .

[2pac Shakur]

JaegerBane wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

I absolutely agree with you there, 2pac shakur. No point in discussing it, really.

JKoopman, you're right, the idea that Eywa didn't just create the Na'vi is more internally consistent, but it still doesn't make the "creation" idea unreasonable IMO.

In fiction, internal consistency is what defines whether something is unreasonable. That's what makes the idea of the Reapers being quasi-cyborgs by way of genetic material reduction tech 'reasonable', but the idea that thy're actually giant space hamsters who survived in Dark Space thanks to regular visits to McDonalds is a load of poop.

http://en.wikipedia....on_of_disbelief

[staldore13]

him ridley scott or neil blompkamp

those are the ones bioware needs

[tausra]

Kevin Smith. There I said it.

[jonnyblueballs]

JKoopman wrote...

I'd rather have J.J. Abrams direct an ME movie than James Cameron.

:sick:No no no no no no no no no absolutely not! We don't need Mass Effect turned into Star Wars prequels like happened with Star Trek.

James Cameron sure as **** beats the **** out of Abrams. Haven't seen Avatar but at least Cameron showed enormous vision and perfectionism in the Terminators and Aliens. Not that i want him to direct this as i don't even want the movie made. But if will be made, you should dream they could get Cameron, which they won't.

[OneDrunkMonk]

Just saw the extended version of Red Cliff. I'm thinking John Woo would probably be a good director for ME.

[JaegerBane]

jonnyblueballs wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

I'd rather have J.J. Abrams direct an ME movie than James Cameron.

:sick:No no no no no no no no no absolutely not! We don't need Mass Effect turned into Star Wars prequels like happened with Star Trek.

James Cameron sure as **** beats the **** out of Abrams. Haven't seen Avatar but at least Cameron showed enormous vision and perfectionism in the Terminators and Aliens. Not that i want him to direct this as i don't even want the movie made. But if will be made, you should dream they could get Cameron, which they won't.

I don't think you've actually explained why you think Abrams would be a bad idea. Typically JJ Abram's forte is a habit of making the fantastical into something more plausible, and that is precisely what the ME movie needs.

Admittedly, James Cameron has a habit of doing the same thing, but generally Abrams tends to be slightly more willing to work with established IPs rather than strictly make their own ones.

And what on earth was wrong with the Star Trek movie? This isn't another one of these 'wah wah wah there were too many explosions and too many people liked it it's not star trek star trek is only for us diehard fans' cliches, is it?