General Movie Discussion

[Kovu]

Thought we might want to move this discussion over to another thread...

But "Star Wars" is historic! It takes place "a long time ago, in a galaxy far away". The relationship between Han Solo and Leia make it a romance too and if blowing up an entire planet with a space station doesn't qualify for disaster then I don't know what does. "Star Wars" has it all! And it's really more of a space fantasy than a sci-fi movie. But honestly, you shouldn't limit yourself to three genres of film. There are so many great film out there, you're only doing a disservice to yourself by not experiencing them.

Haha, don't get me wrong, I do watch other genres. I like horror and fantasy like Harry Potter and The Hobbit/LOTR were good. I really like fairytales, particularly darker retellings like Snow White and the Huntsman/Maleficent. Disney/Pixar movies, regardless of topic, I generally like (Wall-E might be the sole space/machine movie I really enjoyed). I like comedies like 21 Jump Street (the remake with Channing Tatum/Jonah Hill) and crime dramas if done well. I guess the Jurassic Parks could be argued as sci-fi. I just used Historic/romantic/disaster as a preference over space movies since they're Titanic's genres. Honestly, I mostly just don't like space movies. Nothing wrong with them, just not my cup of tea :-) Sorry if I wasn't clear.

[tyrantqueen]

I genuinely dislike Avatar, it confuses to this day that I know people who returned to theaters and saw it 4-5 times over. It also stayed in theaters for something insane like 5 months which probably attributed to it's success.

Good to hear I'm not the only one who despises Avatar. I thought I was. I can't imagine going back and watching something four or five times. Even with films I love I can't imagine doing that.

I guess the Jurassic Parks could be argued as sci-fi. I just used Historic/romantic/disaster as a preference over space movies since they're Titanic's genres. Honestly, I mostly just don't like space movies. Nothing wrong with them, just not my cup of tea :-) Sorry if I wasn't clear.

I think Jurassic Park is a sci-fi thriller

[Halichoeres]

I genuinely dislike Avatar, it confuses to this day that I know people who returned to theaters and saw it 4-5 times over. It also stayed in theaters for something insane like 5 months which probably attributed to it's success.

Good to hear I'm not the only one who despises Avatar. I thought I was. I can't imagine going back and watching something four or five times. Even with films I love I can't imagine doing that.

You definitely aren't. That movie wasn't even good back when it was called "Pocahontas."

[Gwangi]

I genuinely dislike Avatar, it confuses to this day that I know people who returned to theaters and saw it 4-5 times over. It also stayed in theaters for something insane like 5 months which probably attributed to it's success.

Good to hear I'm not the only one who despises Avatar. I thought I was. I can't imagine going back and watching something four or five times. Even with films I love I can't imagine doing that.

You definitely aren't. That movie wasn't even good back when it was called "Pocahontas."

It was better when it was "Dances with Wolves". Visually I cannot deny that "Avatar" is a beautiful film, just the world building alone is worth watching it at least once. Beyond that I can't give it much phrase.

Kovu, guess I just misunderstood you. I thought you really were limiting yourself to those three genres, glad you're more open than that!

"Jurassic Park" can be categorized as a lot of things; thriller, sci-fi, action-adventure, family etc.

[Kovu]

There's no denying that James Cameron is an amazing director. Visually, his movies are spectacular, especially because he's such a stickler for details. Avatar, for all its faults, is visually/artistically is amazing.

Writing and substinance are where his movies tend to fall apart, which is what happened IMO with Avatar. I think the reason Titanic managed to avoid this was that, since it was based on a real ship/events/people (Margaret Brown, Captain Smith, Ismay, Countess of Rothes, etc.), they didn't have to get super creative with set designs/character designs/etc. They could be firmly rooted in the known historical record. It was basically "here's blueprints and fabric swatches". They also didn't have to come up with a morality tale/meaning because it already came with one - hubris being the biggest. Class issues also could be addressed in an organic way through the third/first class discrepancies. The love story, while cliched (hey, cliches become cliches for a reason), also made the central emotional narrative relatable to the majority of those who went to see it in theaters - young couples. And even beyond young couples, when we watched it, we saw two people fighting, first against the odds of class, and then against the odds of survival. And it made us root for them.

The overarching message of Avatar was a wonderful one, and one that I do think we should take to heart. However, I just think the execution of that message was a little messy at times.

Kovu, guess I just misunderstood you. I thought you really were limiting yourself to those three genres, glad you're more open than that!

"Jurassic Park" can be categorized as a lot of things; thriller, sci-fi, action-adventure, family etc.

No worries, bro! You didn't misunderstand, I just worded it terribly. My bad! :-)
Yeah, I always felt that Jurassic Park was more action-adventure than sci-fi. I always considered sci-fi to be when the science goes so far beyond what we have now that it needs to be set in either a different world or super far in the future. Jurassic Park, while obviously scientifically impossible, is rooted in real genetic research/cloning. It's just been applied to an extreme. Theoretically, if we had the DNA, and enough of it, it wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility.
Now, if we should is another question entirely...

[Halichoeres]

It was better when it was "Dances with Wolves".

That's a fact.

[suspsy]

The story behind Avatar is admittedly weak, but I love the visuals and the score. I tend to skip to the exciting parts whenever I pop in my DVD. The final battle is a masterpiece from beginning to end.

Speaking of battles, who else was disgusted by The Battle Of Five Armies? Oh joy, less than a minute of Beorn kicking orc ass in giant bear mode and scene after pointless scene with the slimy assistant guy running around in drag. :p

[alexeratops]

I didn't like Five Armies because I read the Hobbit. In the book, the battle lasted like, 1 chapter.

[Yutyrannus]

I agree, I don't like how the battle was adapted in the film. Plus I was really looking forward to seeing Beorn kill Bolg (or preferably Azog, but he shouldn't be in the film at all) and carry Thorin's body off the battlefield.

They did the Smaug attacking Lake-town part almost perfectly, however. That's actually one of my favorites in the whole trilogy.

EDIT: I forgot to mention, the extended edition is way better though.

[tyrantqueen]

There's no denying that James Cameron is an amazing director. Visually, his movies are spectacular, especially because he's such a stickler for details. Avatar, for all its faults, is visually/artistically is amazing.

Writing and substinance are where his movies tend to fall apart, which is what happened IMO with Avatar. I think the reason Titanic managed to avoid this was that, since it was based on a real ship/events/people (Margaret Brown, Captain Smith, Ismay, Countess of Rothes, etc.), they didn't have to get super creative with set designs/character designs/etc. They could be firmly rooted in the known historical record. It was basically "here's blueprints and fabric swatches". They also didn't have to come up with a morality tale/meaning because it already came with one - hubris being the biggest. Class issues also could be addressed in an organic way through the third/first class discrepancies. The love story, while cliched (hey, cliches become cliches for a reason), also made the central emotional narrative relatable to the majority of those who went to see it in theaters - young couples. And even beyond young couples, when we watched it, we saw two people fighting, first against the odds of class, and then against the odds of survival. And it made us root for them.

*snip*

The things that bugs me about Titanic is that the main characters, Jack and Rose, do not behave like people in the late Edwardian era would have behaved. They are like two nineties teenagers that got transported to 1912. I strongly suspect that two people of such distinctly different classes would have no had no interest in speaking to one another, much less pursuing a relationship. They might as well as been from different planets.

Of course the simple answer is that they're written that way so a modern audience can identify with them. I've never been too invested in the love story, I was actually more interested in the historical side of things. I have to admit my favourite part of the film is when the ship starts sinking and everything goes to Hell in a handbasket

So yeah, Titanic is flawed but I like it. However, my favourite Cameron films are, hands down, Terminator 1 and 2.

[stargatedalek]

Hobbit trilogy was a disappointment in general really, and they have no excuse for cutting out the eagles this time (without them it wasn't even five armies ). Smaug hype honestly carried the whole trilogy for me.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Hobbit trilogy was a disappointment in general really, and they have no excuse for cutting out the eagles this time (without them it wasn't even five armies ). Smaug hype honestly carried the whole trilogy for me.

Maybe I'm missing your meaning of " cutting out" ? The eagles were in the film..at least in the theatrical version I saw.

I do agree Smaug pretty much was the center of the whole series. The first film was great, the 2nd sorta went downhill after mirkwood. the third just deviated way too much...

[Kovu]

The things that bugs me about Titanic is that the main characters, Jack and Rose, do not behave like people in the late Edwardian era would have behaved. They are like two nineties teenagers that got transported to 1912. I strongly suspect that two people of such distinctly different classes would have no had no interest in speaking to one another, much less pursuing a relationship. They might as well as been from different planets.

Of course the simple answer is that they're written that way so a modern audience can identify with them. I've never been too invested in the love story, I was actually more interested in the historical side of things. I have to admit my favourite part of the film is when the ship starts sinking and everything goes to Hell in a handbasket

So yeah, Titanic is flawed but I like it. However, my favourite Cameron films are, hands down, Terminator 1 and 2.

I always kind of justified it by saying Rose was a odd duck for first class. Cal and her mother had the normal reaction to Jack, but yeah, they did come across less Edwardian and more 1990's. Jack was obviously smitten with her from the moment he saw her. Rose, meanwhile, I think saw Jack as a means to escape the prison she felt her life had become. I agree 100% with you that they don't fit historically. I feel like they were written for the story, not the history. While I liked their love story simply because I'm into all that romantic stuff, I will admit that it could've been better written. But at the end of the day, it was a plot device though and we can't question those because otherwise it all just falls apart.   

The other explanation could be that it was simply infatuation and hormones. Think about it, they met on Friday night, now they're dying for each other and its barely Monday. 

If you're interested in Titanic, particularly the historical aspects, but still want the narrative framework, I highly recommend the 2012 miniseries "Titanic". It's four parts and it's really good. Each of the first three episodes focuses on a storyline within each of the classes from boarding the ship to right before the sinking. But all the stories are intertwined, so like, in the first episode we see a couple fighting in their stateroom when a stewardess enters, drops something off and leaves. The couple then continues fighting. The next episode we see the same scene, but we see it as part of the stewardess's storyline. It's a bunch of things like that which I found pretty cool. The last episode is the sinking itself and the various storylines' conclusions. You can get it fairly cheap on Amazon, I got my copy for like $6. Given what you've said you've liked and disliked about Cameron's version, I really think you'd like this miniseries.

[tyrantqueen]

If you're a fan of JC's Titanic, how about checking out Titanic 2: the terrible sequel that never was

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLiG7Fm9Ad0

There was also a terrible movie where some guys tried to raise the Titanic. That was hilariously bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PYla-XON4s

Skip to 1:20:20 for the lulz.

[stargatedalek]

Just a quick question, was this film made before or after we found the wreck? Because I notice that boat in the movie isn't split in two

[tyrantqueen]

Just a quick question, was this film made before or after we found the wreck? Because I notice that boat in the movie isn't split in two

This movie was made in 1980, and the wreck was found five years later, in 1985. There were actual survivors who witnessed the Titanic split in half, but the idea wasn't widely accepted until the wreck was found.

I think they probably opted not to split the boat in half because it looks more impressive that way.

[Kovu]

Several passengers did report that the ship split, however, Second Officer Lightoller testified that she sank "intact" when questioned at the inquiries into the disaster. As the most senior surviving officer, his word was given more weight than anybody else's. When the wreck was discovered, he was proven wrong.

Those are hilariously awful tyrantqueen! Thank you for sharing them  I remember reading the book as an undergrad and wasn't really a fan. Never saw the movie until now, but I have to admit, the dramatic 80s-movie soundtrack really made it. And Titanic 2... wasn't that the plot line to Inception? But...

did you ever see this Titanic 2?

[Plasticbeast95]

I genuinely dislike Avatar, it confuses to this day that I know people who returned to theaters and saw it 4-5 times over. It also stayed in theaters for something insane like 5 months which probably attributed to it's success.

Good to hear I'm not the only one who despises Avatar. I thought I was. I can't imagine going back and watching something four or five times. Even with films I love I can't imagine doing that.

I guess the Jurassic Parks could be argued as sci-fi. I just used Historic/romantic/disaster as a preference over space movies since they're Titanic's genres. Honestly, I mostly just don't like space movies. Nothing wrong with them, just not my cup of tea :-) Sorry if I wasn't clear.

I think Jurassic Park is a sci-fi thriller

I hated Avatar. Its an overrated CGI fest with eyesore visuals and a bland story.

We need to create a new genre: the Dinosaur thriller!

[Rain]

The story wasn't that exciting, it had been done before but there's no denying that movie itself was stunning, the scenery, the fauna and the flora, it just looked great. I totally agree with Gwangi, it's worth watching at least once for the visuals alone.

[Plasticbeast95]

The story wasn't that exciting, it had been done before but there's no denying that movie itself was stunning, the scenery, the fauna and the flora, it just looked great. I totally agree with Gwangi, it's worth watching at least once for the visuals alone.

Meh, I found the visuals to be sub par, just a bunch of blue plants molded after sea life. and the human-sea monkey things entered uncanny valley.