|
|
|
|
|
Avatar
| | |
A paralyzed former marine is subjected to an experimental process allowing him to exist in a genetically engineered biological body - alongside the blue three meter tall ammonia breathing alien species called a Na'vi on the planet Pandora.
His mission is to settle and exploit the planet's resour ...more |
| |
|
|
|
From: guest (uri)
, 174 months, post #41 |
addenda: I chose aluminum because it is about the lightest
real-world material from which you could build a mile-long
structure that would be able to support its own weight at 1g.
The line should have been "... most of which is going to be ]b]fuel or containment for the fuel"
I chose 1g acceleration because it seemed to fit the profile of
mission described in the movie (6 years to go 4.37 l.y, with either
a maximum, or an average, speed of 0,7c)
I did not take into account the loss of mass as the ship coverts
fuel to thrust. This will decrease the out-bound fuel requirements
by as much as 50% (which is still an assload of antimatter).
The value of 0.7c is an interesting choice. The gamma factor (the
amount by which the ship's clocks will appear to moving more slowly
than clocks in a stationary frame of reference) at 0.7c is 0.714.
This means, to the people on the ship, it will appear as if they
are traversing 1 l.y. in a little more than one ship's year.
And that is as pedantic as I am prepared to be on the day before a
holiday.
|
|
From: Mako
, 174 months, post #42 |
How come movies as bad as Transformers aren't subjected to the
micro scientific details I read here? I find it laughable
considering Avatar was made to Entertain. People could rip Star
Wars left and right for it's scientific inaccuracies.
I saw Avatar again yesterday and it holds up well. Again... People
can say oh it's Dances In Wolves in space. Uh... So what. Star Wars
was The Hidden Fortress in space. So?
The one thing I will say is that I was a little peeved Cameron
ripped
off my guy in a wheelchair idea that gets a new body so he can walk
again!! Just kidding. I'm sure he had his story well before I made
The Black Rabbit. Oh well...
- Mako -
|
|
From: kreplach
, 174 months, post #43 |
You don't need to be a physicist to find big plot holes in most
films or TV shows, sci fi or otherwise. Either you choose not to
"grade on a curve" or you just go along with it and suspend
disbelief enough to try to be entertained. The fact that they
shouldn't have been able to get to Pandora or else wouldn't they
have needed a mined energy source is not as big a sin in my opinion
as the fact that the ore is called unobtainium. That gripe aside,
it was a pretty good video game... I mean, movie.
|
|
From: guest (Madaba)
, 174 months, post #44 |
"How come movies as bad as Transformers aren't subjected to the
micro scientific details I read here? I find it laughable
considering Avatar was made to Entertain. People could rip Star
Wars left and right for it's scientific inaccuracies."
Are you serious? Transformers was ripped to shreds over and over
again for every damn scene. Avatar is getting a pass for a lot of
stupid shit for some strange reason.
|
|
From: Michael Binary
, 174 months, post #45 |
> I saw Avatar again yesterday and it holds up well. Again...
People can say oh it's
> Dances In Wolves in space.
I read an article (Süddeutsche Zeitung, a newspaper) about
Cameron's Avatar, and he said it was intended. Furthermore he said,
he put a lot of stuff in AVATAR he had read in childhood or when he
was a teenager.
> wheelchair idea
Peter Sellers comes to my mind ;-)) SCNR
|
|
From: Mako
, 174 months, post #46 |
I'd rather enjoy one of the best sci-fi/fantasy movies made in
years than get stuck on the name of the ore. Wow... that just seems
really sad to me. Can we say "it's a movie?". Not some NASA
documentary. Have fun picking apart the next Star Trek movie. I can
see it now... "How can Spock be in two places at once? That is
illogical!". Hahahahahahahaha
- Mako -
|
|
From: guest (TheSaint)
, 174 months, post #47 |
If you want to rip something apart. This man does it well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI
|
|
From: guest (Return of the Undead Noble Savages)
, 174 months, post #48 |
310 million US$ to produce it and 150 million US$ to market it.How
many other movie
scripts died so that Avatar could live?
|
|
From: guest (hallohallo)
, 174 months, post #49 |
does avatar have any real TF in it? or is it just "virtual reality"
where the marine is controlling his avatar through computers and
sensors? i still want to see the movie
|
|
From: Michael Binary
, 174 months, post #50 |
> Hahahahahahahaha
A marine comes to the Na'vi ;-)) SCNR
> does avatar have any real TF in it?
Spoiler:Click to show spoiler
lrf, V'q yvxr gb fnl
|
|
From: Michael Binary
, 174 months, post #51 |
I forgot: The rating on the international movie data base is
excellent :-)
One of the top movies!
|
|
From: guest (sigmapisigma)
, 174 months, post #52 |
How come movies as bad as Transformers aren't subjected to the
micro scientific details I read here? I find it laughable
considering Avatar was made to Entertain. People could rip Star
Wars left and right for it's scientific inaccuracies...
I'd rather enjoy one of the best sci-fi/fantasy movies made in
years than get stuck on the name of the ore. Wow... that just seems
really sad to me. Can we say "it's a movie?"
uri explained that, as a scientist, he is not the best audience for
this kind of movie, but his scientific nit-picking seems to have
been secondary to the "trite" plot and the aesthetics of the CGI.
As far as I can tell, the detailed analysis he posted here was in
direct response to Lady Sekhmet's comment about an "actual
scientific critique". I don't think that Lady Sekhmet did meant
that "actual" as a flame, but I understand why uri might have
thought he was being called out.
I agree with uri's position on the Na'vi (and why is there an
apostrophe in that word?). Anthropomorphic aliens are boring and
the performance capture animation was a little creepy. The idea
that an intelligent species that evolved on a planet light years
away from earth would not only look like humans but have a spoken
language, and a non-verbal language (facial expressions, body
postures) which conveyed the same emotions in the same ways as
human language, is really very silly.
I hadn't given any thought to the unobtainium as a plot device, but
it really doesn't seem like all that much of a prize. I wonder why
they just didn't go all the way to Cavorite? You still get a planet
that looks like a Roger Dean album cover painting, but the prize
would be a whole lot more valuable.
I did really enjoy the movie, but I can see how it might have been
difficult for someone who thinks about this kind of thing for a
living to maintain a willing suspension of disbelief.
What is interesting in this thread are the attempts, by some, to
invalidate the negative reviews of the movie. I wonder what that's
about?
|
|
From: kreplach
, 174 months, post #53 |
For the record, Mako, I was saying the opposite of it should be a
NASA documentary. However, I do think "unobtanium" is a poor joke
that falls flat and takes you out of the moment of the movie. Not a
big deal, just a quibble.
|
|
From: Lady Sekhmet
, 174 months, post #54 |
What ever happened to just enjoying the fantasy of the film? Anyone
who has seen Disney's Fantasia will tell you how awesome it was,
and yet it had no real storyline and certainly had no basis in
reality. The whole point was to tickle the imagination, to allow
you sit back and immerse yourself in an impossible world.
Avatar is a fantasy. If you can't watch it without your mind
fixating on technical inconsistencies or even impossibilities, well
I feel bad for you. For myself, it was very enjoyable. I've seen it
twice in theater so far, and it was a treat each time.
What I find really perplexing is that here we have a robust film
that has as part of the plot line the idea that you can transfer
your consciousness into an alien body. Of all places, I would have
expected the folks on Metamorphosis to embrace the film. The
goddess knows its far more enjoyable that the vast majority of TF
fiction out there.
And for those who hated it, all I can suggest is that you get
yourself a nice bottle of Merlot, draw a warm bath with scented
oils and candles, relax and laugh at the implausibility of your own
existence. You need to lighten up and just enjoy the beauty of
things without deconstructing them :)
|
|
From: Mako
, 174 months, post #55 |
Well... let me take a step back and remember... not everyone is the
same:
People can get hung up on details that others don't all the time.
For example I had issues with the new STAR TREK movie's logic that
took me right out of the film (I know some of the major makers of
that movie - and they knew they had story holes - but JJ didn't
care - is what I was told) HAHAHAHAHA.
Anyways... my point... is that I couldn't enjoy the movie as much
cause I got too hung up on it. I know other people that loved the
movie and didn't have issues with it like I have. And I get the
sense AVATAR is no different. Although... I'm on the other end of
the playing field this time. Even after watching the movie 2x
now... I enjoyed it so much... I just don't care or see the issues
that some other people do.
Lady S - I too thought AVATAR was a perfect movie for any TF/Body
Swap fan - just in the premise of inhabiting another being. Living
that life. And discovering what it's like to not be stuck in your
own skin. It's a spiritual and intellectual awakening that's a big
part of why some of us are so into TF themes.
Kreplach - I know what you're going after with the poor joke of the
name. And I see your point. It just didn't have the same effect on
me as it has yourself. Cheers ;)
- Mako -
|
|
From: guest (sigmapisigma)
, 174 months, post #56 |
Kreplach - You know that "unobtainium" is an old joke in the SF
community yes? Are you objecting to the in-jokiness of the name, or
just to the jokiness of the name?
Lady Sekhmet - I was kind of surprised to see Avatar listed here.
The "AVTR" technology is not a transformation, IMO. It is a
telefactor device, just a very sophisticated waldo.
However, even if the hero was physically transformed into a Na'vi,
that would not give the director and writers license to make a
boring movie. Some of us go to the movies hoping to be engaged
intellectually as well as emotionally or viscerally. It is a
perfectly valid position to be disappointed by a hackneyed plot, or
flaws in story logic. You can overlook these things,
congratulations. The fact that some others could not, or chose not
to, does not mean that you did not enjoy the movie, nor that you
are a stupid person for having enjoyed the movie.
|
|
From: guest (uri)
, 174 months, post #57 |
quote Mako: How come movies as bad as Transformers aren't subjected to the
micro scientific details I read here? I find it laughable
considering Avatar was made to Entertain. People could rip Star
Wars left and right for it's scientific inaccuracies
You aren't hanging out in the right places. Look at the science
blogs hosted by Discover
or Seed
Magazine. The science content of movies is a frequent topic for
posts.
IRL, science instructors spend a lot of time fielding questions
about SF movies and TV shows. True, we mostly try to correct
inaccuracies and misconceptions. but we occasionally get to talk
about ideas that are introduced -- but not fully developed -- as
part of a movie plot.
Movies like "The Core", "The Day After Tomorrow", "Deep Impact" and
"2012", get ripped apart by science instructors, frequently for the
benefit of a class of undergraduates.
However, scientifically literate writers sometimes allude to some
technology which is intended to overcome a physical constraint that
would prevent a plot device from functioning as required by the
story.
The "Heisenberg Compensator" component of the transporters in the
Star Trek universe, for instance. The writers never try to explain
how it works, which is fine. It does, however, give a Trekker
physics professor an opportunity to talk to her students about WHY
such a device would be required to make the transporter possible.
^,^
"Star Wars" generally gets a pass because -- for Episodes IV-VI
anyway -- George Lucas wasn't even pretending to be writing science
fiction. It is a universe in which magic works. "Star Wars" doesn't
bother scientists for the same reason that "Lord of the Rings"
doesn't bother historians.
Lady S. Guest (SigmaPiSigma) has it mostly right. I really don't
care that
much about the scientific wrongness and would have ignored the
inaccuracies and improbabilities, except that I didn't have
anywhere else to go.
As others have observed, it is a longer, louder, flashier version
of "The Last Samurai" or "Dances with Wolves". I wasn't interested
in seeing another white guy undergo a spiritual awakening among the
not-white-but-noble savages, win the heart of the most beautiful of
the not-white maidens, and become a war-chief to her not-white
people. I always knew exactly where the movie was going, many long,
loud, flashy minutes before it got there.
I could say that I feel sorry for anyone who lacks the discernment
and sophistication to recognize how vapidly ethnocentric and stale
the plot was -- but that would be offensively patronizing.
SigmaPiSigma - Roger Dean! Thank you! Those floating mountains were
tweaking my entorhinal cortex, but I could not make the connection.
|
|
From: Mako
, 174 months, post #58 |
Uri,
Thanks for the links. But in my original question (which you
quoted)... I asked specifically about this forum. Not somewhere
else like DISCOVER, which is not normally in the practice of
reviewing movies for entertainment reasons. If in the future - I
want to read about the broken science of Transformers 3 or Avatar 2
- then now I have such a link - so thank you.
Quote from URI: "I could say that I feel sorry for anyone who lacks
the discernment and sophistication to recognize how vapidly
ethnocentric and stale the plot was -- but that would be
offensively patronizing".
I could also say I feel sorry for anyone who lacks imagination;
empathy; an emotional connection to people; and respect for free
thinking individuals - but that would also be offensively
patronizing too. ;)
- Mako -
|
|
From: guest (uri)
, 174 months, post #59 |
Mako - In the second half of post 57, I was responding to what what
Lady Sekhmet wrote in post #54.
As SigmaPiSigma noted, post #40/41 -- the lengthy description of
the evolutionary improbability of the Na'vi, the techno-babble
nonsense of the AVTR proxies, and the physics of interstellar
travel -- was also addressed to Lady S.
In the future, I think I will just ignore Lady S.
About the reviews in this forum, FWIW I contributed to a similar
digression on the science content of the television series 'V" just
a few months ago.
As an aside, a friend off mine made a comment about Avatar that you
might find amusing. Like you, he is a movie editor (albeit, from a
generation ago; he cut film and did sound mixing on Hollywood
features in the 70s and early 80s). Like me, he is a curmudgeon.
He said something to the effect of: "James Cameron is only making
movies so he can shoot the 'making-of' featurette for the DVD".
This was in response to all hype about the "performance capture"
technology, and the ubiquitous footage of Cameron walking around
the soundstage with his "Magic Widow" virtual camera.
|
|
From: guest
, 174 months, post #60 |
I think what many people are forgetting here is that
Big-multimillion dollar, mass released Blockbuster films like James
Cameron's Avatar, Star Wars, Transformers, Star Trek, 2012,, etc,
etc is FICTION.
It doesn't really matter if it can be explained perfectly in
scientific terms, if the plot/dialogue is cheesy, or if it has
enormous plot holes, because that's not what these kinds of films
are made for. These Film aren't supposed to be intelligent in any
way. They are designed to appeal to mass audiences and ultimately
generate the most amount of profit they can.
The Directors of these films don't want to make their films
intelligent, as intelligent films tend to drive people away.
Directors want these sorts of films to have explosions, actions,
romance, comedy, and other such things doesn't require the audience
to think to much about.
Of course those who want to be provoked, and want explanations as
to why things work the way they do in the film, are offended by
such "stupid, un-realistic" films. But these people are the
minority, and the Directors want to appeal to the majority, which
don't want "smart, realistic" films.
What I'm trying to get across here is that Avatar is doing great in
generating huge sums of revenue, which is ultimately what large
budgets films with big name actors and directors are meant to do.
More intelligent Sci-fi crowds tend to watch Indie Sci-Fi Films:
films with smaller budgets, lesser-known (or unknown) actors and
more realism. "Moon" is an example of one such film
Then there are the films that Border on the line of Indie and
Blockbuster, who have large-ish budgets, lesser-known/unknown
actors and directors, but usually at least one person working on
the film is big name. This sort of film tries to appeal to both
audiences, the intellectual crowd and the less-intellectual crowd.
These films will try to balance the realism and intelligence with
mindless action scenes. The only example that comes to my mind at
this time is District 9.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a New Message to This Thread
Posting Guidelines
Primary
- ANY POST(s) MAY BE REMOVED at the discretion of moderators
for violation of this website's guidelines/rules or any law
applicable to this website.
- All discussions must be transformation related OR of interest to
the transformation community.
- Please try to keep posts appropriate for younger teenage eyes to
view (Things you'd be comfortable sharing with a 13 year-old).
- Do not 'attack' other posters. You may attack an individual's
comments but not the individual.
- Be polite, courteous, and respectful. Please keep the conversations
civil.
- While use of an online alias is ok. Do NOT pretend to be another
(or registered) user.
Intellectual Property
- Do not post direct links to complete copyrighted works. Links
provided by (or approved by) the copyright holder may
be exempt.
- Links to content hosted on websites that have a clear, and easy to
find, process for dealing with infringement(s); and a known
reputation for following through with said process, may
be allowed.
- Please read this site's views on copyrighted content on the FAQ
page.
- Do not plagiarize. Credit your sources.
Helpful
- For posts and material that are not safe for viewing in a workplace
or with younger eyes, please mark the thread or post as either, "MATURE CONTENT", "ADULT CONTENT",
or "NSFW".
- Please post clear SPOILER warnings if you intend to give away
details that would spoil the story for those who have not yet seen
the material, preferably by using the spoiler
tags (don't forget to close the spoiler text with the end tag),
like so: <spoiler>Text to be "hidden"
</spoiler>
-- For additional help, please see: HOW TO: Use Spoiler tags
message thread.
- When starting a New Message Thread, please include details about
your topic of discussion or request in the Subject
field to help draw in readers who are interested and avoid wasting
the time of those who are not. Also helpful in searching for the
topic/thread later.
- If you post a link, please provide some detail as to what it is.
Identify the material if possible.
- Please post in English, or include an English translation, when
possible.
- If seeking material / information, include the results of your own
efforts so that others can offer better help (and avoid wasting
time and effort on redundant searches).
- When starting a new thread to request material or information,
please begin the subject with "REQ:"
or "REQUEST".
Etiquette
- Do not post messages in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.
- Do not attack a user for improper spelling and/or grammar. Not all
of our community uses English as their native language.
- Please do not stray (far) from the topic of the original post.
- If a poster provides their contact information for any reason, do
NOT clutter the Message Board by asking them to contact you. They
gave out their contact information for a reason.
- No begging. Ask nicely.
- Do not feed the trolls and spammers. Please ignore them.
- Do not keep asking for clips after others have already posted
information on where to obtain the material.
- Please have some patience. Not everyone visits the board daily.
Your post may not be seen (by someone with the correct information
or idea) for several days or weeks.
- No bumping. Bumping will be treated as intentional spamming.
Advertising
- Do not post advertisements.
- One exception is for products or services that relate to entries on
this site. And even then, only post an announcement once. You
should add links or content to the appropriate database entries. Do
not repeat this information to the message board. Doing so will be
considered spamming.
Miscellaneous
- This list is neither all-inclusive or all-exclusive in nature, and
is meant to guide everyone on appropriate content for and conduct
on this Message Board.
- The purpose of this Message Board is to share information about
transformation-related content, news, ideas, etc. Also acceptable,
are conversations that are of interest to the transformation
community.
- Moderation of posts for reasons not listed above are at the
discretion of the Trusted Users who moderate this website, for the
purpose of keeping things within the "spirit" of the owner's wishes
and the website's purpose.
- If you disagree with a moderation decision, please make an argument
as to why it should be reinstated. Use the posting guidelines to justify your point.
Do not attack the moderator.
[Edit this Page] | |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|