re: Just watched Gravity on HBO

quote:

---

I haven't seen you or any of the major defenders of the movie try to defend the plot. So yes, it is a very similar debate to the Avatar debate.

You simply refuse to step back and see the similarities.

---

Actually I did. Far back in the Gravity thread. I said the simplicity of the plot was necessary and valid. It didn't NEED a grand story, and that's the big difference between it an Avatar.

quote:

---

Both had stunning visuals and 3-D. Both had to be seen only on the big screen in 3-D.

Both had bad plots and dialog. Avatar had questionable character development. Gravity had none.

You and most of the defenders hated Avatar and yet you use the SAME argument PRO Gravity that you fought against for Avatar. yes, it is a fact.

---

No it isn't. This is way too reductive. These are far from similar films. To say that this is similar means that the films follow similar lines, that they have the same kind of goal, which they don't. If you told Cameron that the point of Avatar was to be a pretty movie, he'd slap you.

The man was concerned with myth-making and world building. He focused on grand stories. Heroes, scenery chewing villains, Big explosions, a transcendence of mankind almost. He was trying to create the next giant space opera.

If you couldn't tell that the film tried to be more than

quote:

---

stunning visuals and 3-D. Both had to be seen only on the big screen in 3-D.

---

then I'm sorry you're just wrong. Did Cameron want his movie to be intense? Sure. Did he want it to be a spectacle? Yes. But he also had massive political statements behind his film. He was TRYING for a grand story arc that created an entire new universe for people to explore. He even had video games in mind when he designed the film. Again, he was reaching high, and he failed miserably, because..

quote:

---

bad plots and dialog. Avatar had questionable character development.

---

I don't like Gravity because it HAS no story, because that isn't the point. Gravity isn't trying to have a complex story that gets in the way of the intense action. Like I said above, Gravity was all about willing to let yourself be taken on the ride. Literally. A ride. The film was a visual ride. The story's simplicity was meant to allow everything else to occur.

Now we can argue whether or not that's a worthwhile experience. The difference between Avatar and Gravity is that Gravity succeeded in what it set out to do, while Avatar didn't. Avatar was laughably bad at points. And yes it ENDED UP a simple visual feast, but that wasn't the point of Avatar.

Gravity wasn't trying to be a political statement. It wasn't trying to tell this grand story arc. It wasn't building a universe. It was a relatively simple tale of ONE SINGLE PERSON learning how to cope. It worked well enough, and low key enough, to let the audience kind of place themselves in her shoes in terms of the action.

Just look at the scope, Avatar was trying to develop a CIVILIZATION. Gravity was looking at one single person. Those are two completely different films.