Comments on: 2012 over Avatar?

By: martymankins

martymankins — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:27:21 +0000

nilsa – Stale is a good word to describe the story line.

By: SoMi's Nilsa

SoMi's Nilsa — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:01:18 +0000

We saw Avatar over the weekend. And while I haven’t yet seen 2012, I don’t blame you for choosing another movie over Avatar. It was definitely cool and the technology behind the movie was amazing, but the story line itself. Stale at best.

By: martymankins

martymankins — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 16:50:59 +0000

kapgar – I still have yet to see Terminator 3, but I know what you are saying about The Sarah Connor Chronicles. It seemed to lose steam towards the end.

ren – Point by point… that may need an extended comment, but one strong comparison that I saw was how Billy Zane’s character in Titanic was very similar in his fervency to Stephen Lang’s character (Colonel Quaritch) in Avatar. Both seemed so bent on making sure that their goals were met, even if it meant the death of many. Once his relationship faded with Rose, Caledon (Zane) became hell bent on making sure his agenda would be done. Same with Quaritch. He took Jake (Worthington) under his wing. Once their relationship soured, Quaritch stopped at nothing to make sure his agenda was met.

Sure, that kind of thing exists in all films, but with both being Cameron films, it’s as if the characters were different, but the same in screenplay interaction.

The story of 2012 just seemed to resonate well with me.

By: Ren

Ren — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:10:31 +0000

I’ve seen Avatar’s plot likened to “Fern Gully in Space” or “Dances With Wolves”, both of which seem more apt than “Titanic”. But even those are honestly quite different stories. I’d like to see your point-by-point parallelism between Avatar and Titanic — I suspect you could successfully drop in any number of movies into such a comparison, 2012 included.

What’s funny (to me) about this comment is that I didn’t think Avatar was all that good and wasn’t even looking forward to it. When I did see it, it was a bit better than my expectations, but certainly nothing spectacular. The 3D seemed no different than other recent efforts, and that took something away from the visuals for me. It was a Catch-22 though, as I would’ve been left wondering about the 3D if I hadn’t seen it that way. I thought the story itself had some interesting aspects, but much was not very well explored — particularly unfortunate giving that it clocked in at nearly three hours as it was.

Regarding “2012″, I haven’t decided if it will be added to my wish list. I own and enjoy rewatching both “Independence Day” and “The Day After Tomorrow” (the later is still on my “watch annually” list), but I don’t have the same feeling for 2012, at least not yet. It had its moments, but I don’t think I was ever really compelled by the story.

By: kapgar

kapgar — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 03:50:43 +0000

Yeah, that’s always been my reason for not liking anything other than the original Terminator. I prefer to think that the other films never were made. The Sarah Connor Chronicles were decent mostly because Summer Glau is hot and there was no T800 (Schwarzenegger model, I think). That made it forgivable. Until it became unwatchable.

By: martymankins

martymankins — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 22:12:22 +0000

avitable – Off my rocker I will be. I admit (and agree with Kim) that the last line of the movie was ultra cheesy.

kapgar – wow. I think you are the first person I’ve known to have dissed T2. But you have a good consistency reason.

By: kapgar

kapgar — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:41:18 +0000

Haven’t seen either to be able to compare.

For me, I’m not sure which I’d rather watch if I had to pick one. I like Independence Day a lot, but never had any desire to see The Day After Tomorrow. And I love Aliens, Terminator, and a few other Cameron films, but disliked Terminator 2 (blasphemy, I know, but the Terminator is a BAD GUY! HE CANNOT BE REPROGRAMMED!)

By: Avitable

Avitable — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:51:41 +0000

Yeah, I think you’re totally off your rocker. I saw both in theaters and while 2012 was fun, it was stupid as all hell, too.

By: martymankins

martymankins — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 03:56:08 +0000

kevin – Another one that took a long time to see Titanic. I think visually, Avatar is entertaining. But you need a good original story, too. I will be curious to read your thoughts on 2012 when you watch it.

sybil law – Thank you. I would be curious to hear your thoughts if/when you decide to watch either movie.

By: Sybil Law

Sybil Law — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:15:14 +0000

I haven’t seen either movie. I think you sound right.

By: Kevin Spencer

Kevin Spencer — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:52:28 +0000

Can’t really comment as I haven’t seen either movie Of the two though, I think I’d rather watch 2012. Everything I’ve read about Avatar seems to be some variation of “amazing effects, story quite lacking” so still not sure if I’ll watch it when it comes out on DVD. Like you though, it took me ages to watch Titanic so maybe by the time it does come out, I’ll be more enthusiastic about it