By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
megaman79 on 20 December 2009
Edit Thread
Reasonable said:
FaRmLaNd said:
Its definetely a suitable setting for further movies. Yes it was a tad predictable, but when a movie costs this much they maybe weren't willing to risk it on a more interesting narrative. Its still well worth a watch.

Yeah, that's very much the case.  I think I just got a little optimisitc that Cameron, who could have chosen to take some risks with his status, chose to play it safe himself.

I'd just watched Where The Wild Things Are a few days before and was amazed at the balls of Spike Jonez to take the amount of money he was given for this film and make a risky, meditative film that completely bucked the trend of what you'd be expected to do with that amount of money for a kids film.

At least Avatar wasn't bad, apart from a few cheesy lines.  Although derivitive the story was consistent and competently told, I just wanted more than a lot of familiar beats.  Maybe next time we visit Pandora Cameron will take a few risks.

Original scriptment was complex and had many more characters. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/43429

Judging by what is actually left in the film it is a huge tragedy that all this was cut.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.