So, I’m hearing that Avatar is visually brilliant–like brown your trousers brilliant–but with a boilerplate story. Doesn’t that sort of sum up all of Cameron’s movies? The guy is a brilliant filmmaker, hugely talented with technology and visual storytelling, but the actual stories are not really that great, when you get down to it. Great story moments–iconic ones–of course, but the plots lack overall.
Of course, but his stories never had the type of depth other filmmakers could squeeze out of old stories. Visually, he’s a brilliant storyteller, but he’s primary strength is not plotting. You can use a contrast like Chris Nolan, who’s no slouch visually, but is absolutely brilliant at plotting. Watch Memento or The Prestige. Shyamalan’s best work can’t begin to touch the twists Nolan can wrap into a storyline. Could you imagine what Avatar would’ve been with Cameron directing from one of Nolan’s scripts?
Some people are not comfortable with their limitations. Lucas comes to mind also. I wish Cameron and Lucas would just be the concept and wow factor guys and let an actual director do what they do best.
Lucas is a franchise genius. He was, at one time, a very capable director, but he had too much success too quickly and came to believe his hype. He’s been in an echo chamber ever since and his creativity suffered as a result.
Commercially, Cameron has never disappointed. His strengths and weaknesses have tended to balance out and he had enough sense to keep his hair-trigger liberalism in the background.
Spielberg still has talent, but he’s kowtowed to the liberals. His ears are ringing so loudly with the echoes in the chamber, he’s tone-deaf to storytelling.
Shyamalan did the ego-implosion quicker than most. Very capable director, but he has to sharpen his script-work, or let someone else take those duties.
Ridley Scott is still firing on all cylinders.
Snyder and Nolan seem to know their talents and limitations. Nolan may be the best director working right now, where coming from an indie/arthouse background, he’s made films across multiple and widely divergent genres and has yet to make one that wasn’t worth critical praise. Brad Bird might also be able to claim that mantle, with a string of animated hits that elevate their genre.
Cameron may not disappoint commercially, but in my opinion, he is boring plot wise. I just checked his page on IMDB, the only movie I ever liked of his was True Lies and even then I was a little bored with the plot. But it wouldn’t be the first time I didn’t like what was selling.
Over on my site, we’ve talked about how in crappy old B-movies, there’s kind of a partnership between filmakers and audience – they tell us a story, and we agree not to notice that the space ship is made of plywood.
The problem with modern special effects is that it makes it too easy to show anything, whereas in older films the SFX were used somewhat more sparingly, and only when the situation called for it. They weren’t immersive. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with immersive special effect – Blade Runner, for instance, used ‘em brilliantly – but mostly directors seem to just want us to leer and how neat everyting is, and because there’s no limitation to what they can show, they don’t structure it to fit the story.
Not just an SF problem, it’s also true of the Narnia flicks and the Pirates of the Carribean movies.
Love your first paragraph. The contract between the entertainer and the entertained is somewhat sacred, but current Hollywood, at least a good bit of it, is more interested in showing us what they can do than if we are interested. My little ones are like that too, but they grow out of it.
THAT IS INSULTING! A revolution to begin in Bergen and Oslo over this! MEL ARE YOU NUTS? Yes! DiCaprio? Yeah but he sells seats in lower slobobia…I know no one cares about him in the US…ARGGHH! My ancestors are in Valhalla stratergizing an assault on Mel’s Figi retreat. Long ships show up out of the mist….
My friend who knows things now says the Dems are going to attempt to force a floor vote either the weekend before Christmas or on the weekend of the 26th and 27th. He said right now they only have a solid 54 votes with 2 likely, 2 possibly, and Lieberman has them hung up. He says there is lots of closed door arm twisting, more than he has ever seen and I’m quoting here “a palpable sense of panic” among Democrats. He also says the Republican goal at this point is to try and tie it up until right around February which will be the true beginning of fundraising season for 2010 campaigns and they figure if they can do that then this bill is so unpopular that it will simply fade away.
Good to hear. There seems to be evidence emerging of a cool down among the netroots, which may mean a loss of a vote or two. Assuming Lieberman holds his current position, Nelson will feel safe in his, as he isn’t the lighting rod.
Certainly not. The motif seems to have sprung from costume design in Wagnerian opera. Around the time the operas were being staged, little figurines and images were found in northern Europe showing men in what seemed to be horned helmets (there’s some confusion as to what they actually represent). Also, a couple Bronze Age horned helmets have shown up in archaeological sites.
The misunderstanding was to think these were war helmets. They were not. They were almost certainly ceremonial wear for priests, representing the power of the bull or aurochs.
Horned helmets are an exceedingly bad idea in actual warfare. They give your enemy a lever with which to knock your head protection off.
I can’t believe Rich isn’t all over this. There is an outstanding article on 100 reasons why man made climate change is a lie on the Daily Mail right now. Everyone should take a look at this:
Kathy Ireland now is more in the MILF territory but back in “the day” oh definitely hot even though I’m not usually a huge fan of the square jaw on women.
@ Tracy: Thank you! You’d be surprised how many people don’t get that. (“That’s not an alien, that’s a horse-faced Jewish dude with a bowl cut and green eyeshadow” “Yes, I know, but he *represents* an alien.” “Well, that’s just so fake, how can anyone watch this?” etc)
@ Mike: Hot. Then. Now. Milfy, but not really so hot last time I saw her.
Why would anyone get upset that Mel Gibson is making a movie with a popular actor who’s actually pretty talented? (First time I ever saw Leo was in “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape,” and I had *NO* idea they didn’t actually get a mentally disabled person to play the part.)
$100+ million isn’t what it used to be, but The Departed more than cleared that mark. Surprised to see The Aviator just got over the $100 million as well. As for budgets, though…
He was fabulous in Gilbert Grape and pretty good in Catch Me If You Can, but other than that, I don’t like him much. I hated Titanic so much it tainted everyone in it for me. I also made the mistake of hearing an interview with him and he was such a little stuck up punk, treated the interviewer like trash. So he’s sunk for me. This is why if Johnny Depp shows up on TV, I run screaming from the room. I don’t wanna know any more about him than if he can act.
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
So, I’m hearing that Avatar is visually brilliant–like brown your trousers brilliant–but with a boilerplate story. Doesn’t that sort of sum up all of Cameron’s movies? The guy is a brilliant filmmaker, hugely talented with technology and visual storytelling, but the actual stories are not really that great, when you get down to it. Great story moments–iconic ones–of course, but the plots lack overall.
But it’s the old story well-told…. or hopefully well-told. Very few, if any, great films have any truly new plot points or characters for that matter.
Of course, but his stories never had the type of depth other filmmakers could squeeze out of old stories. Visually, he’s a brilliant storyteller, but he’s primary strength is not plotting. You can use a contrast like Chris Nolan, who’s no slouch visually, but is absolutely brilliant at plotting. Watch Memento or The Prestige. Shyamalan’s best work can’t begin to touch the twists Nolan can wrap into a storyline. Could you imagine what Avatar would’ve been with Cameron directing from one of Nolan’s scripts?
Some people are not comfortable with their limitations. Lucas comes to mind also. I wish Cameron and Lucas would just be the concept and wow factor guys and let an actual director do what they do best.
Lucas is a franchise genius. He was, at one time, a very capable director, but he had too much success too quickly and came to believe his hype. He’s been in an echo chamber ever since and his creativity suffered as a result.
Commercially, Cameron has never disappointed. His strengths and weaknesses have tended to balance out and he had enough sense to keep his hair-trigger liberalism in the background.
Spielberg still has talent, but he’s kowtowed to the liberals. His ears are ringing so loudly with the echoes in the chamber, he’s tone-deaf to storytelling.
Shyamalan did the ego-implosion quicker than most. Very capable director, but he has to sharpen his script-work, or let someone else take those duties.
Ridley Scott is still firing on all cylinders.
Snyder and Nolan seem to know their talents and limitations. Nolan may be the best director working right now, where coming from an indie/arthouse background, he’s made films across multiple and widely divergent genres and has yet to make one that wasn’t worth critical praise. Brad Bird might also be able to claim that mantle, with a string of animated hits that elevate their genre.
Cameron may not disappoint commercially, but in my opinion, he is boring plot wise. I just checked his page on IMDB, the only movie I ever liked of his was True Lies and even then I was a little bored with the plot. But it wouldn’t be the first time I didn’t like what was selling.
Over on my site, we’ve talked about how in crappy old B-movies, there’s kind of a partnership between filmakers and audience – they tell us a story, and we agree not to notice that the space ship is made of plywood.
The problem with modern special effects is that it makes it too easy to show anything, whereas in older films the SFX were used somewhat more sparingly, and only when the situation called for it. They weren’t immersive. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with immersive special effect – Blade Runner, for instance, used ‘em brilliantly – but mostly directors seem to just want us to leer and how neat everyting is, and because there’s no limitation to what they can show, they don’t structure it to fit the story.
Not just an SF problem, it’s also true of the Narnia flicks and the Pirates of the Carribean movies.
Love your first paragraph. The contract between the entertainer and the entertained is somewhat sacred, but current Hollywood, at least a good bit of it, is more interested in showing us what they can do than if we are interested. My little ones are like that too, but they grow out of it.
I’m palming my face today because of this news: http://www.france24.com/en/node/4948325
A Viking movie from Mel? Great. Bring it on.
Casting Leo DiCaprio as a Viking? No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no…
THAT IS INSULTING! A revolution to begin in Bergen and Oslo over this! MEL ARE YOU NUTS? Yes! DiCaprio? Yeah but he sells seats in lower slobobia…I know no one cares about him in the US…ARGGHH! My ancestors are in Valhalla stratergizing an assault on Mel’s Figi retreat. Long ships show up out of the mist….
Wait, maybe Mel can find and bring out the good, macho, manly actor in Leo that has been waiting to come out . . .
Right? . . .
Anybody . . .
Chirp, chirp, chirp . . .
That picture is unsettling.
My friend who knows things now says the Dems are going to attempt to force a floor vote either the weekend before Christmas or on the weekend of the 26th and 27th. He said right now they only have a solid 54 votes with 2 likely, 2 possibly, and Lieberman has them hung up. He says there is lots of closed door arm twisting, more than he has ever seen and I’m quoting here “a palpable sense of panic” among Democrats. He also says the Republican goal at this point is to try and tie it up until right around February which will be the true beginning of fundraising season for 2010 campaigns and they figure if they can do that then this bill is so unpopular that it will simply fade away.
Good to hear. There seems to be evidence emerging of a cool down among the netroots, which may mean a loss of a vote or two. Assuming Lieberman holds his current position, Nelson will feel safe in his, as he isn’t the lighting rod.
Yeah, congress is planning on being in session every weekend in December with no end in sight.
Lars,you are the source…Vikings didn’t really have horns on their helmets,did they?
Certainly not. The motif seems to have sprung from costume design in Wagnerian opera. Around the time the operas were being staged, little figurines and images were found in northern Europe showing men in what seemed to be horned helmets (there’s some confusion as to what they actually represent). Also, a couple Bronze Age horned helmets have shown up in archaeological sites.
The misunderstanding was to think these were war helmets. They were not. They were almost certainly ceremonial wear for priests, representing the power of the bull or aurochs.
Horned helmets are an exceedingly bad idea in actual warfare. They give your enemy a lever with which to knock your head protection off.
Thanks,Lars..exactly what I read recently
I can’t believe Rich isn’t all over this. There is an outstanding article on 100 reasons why man made climate change is a lie on the Daily Mail right now. Everyone should take a look at this:
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/146138
I knew if I didn’t post this I would be publicly beaten.
Fine, Veruckt, but you’re dodging the real issue.
Kathy Ireland: hot or not?
Kathy Ireland now is more in the MILF territory but back in “the day” oh definitely hot even though I’m not usually a huge fan of the square jaw on women.
@ Tracy: Thank you! You’d be surprised how many people don’t get that. (“That’s not an alien, that’s a horse-faced Jewish dude with a bowl cut and green eyeshadow” “Yes, I know, but he *represents* an alien.” “Well, that’s just so fake, how can anyone watch this?” etc)
@ Mike: Hot. Then. Now. Milfy, but not really so hot last time I saw her.
Why would anyone get upset that Mel Gibson is making a movie with a popular actor who’s actually pretty talented? (First time I ever saw Leo was in “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape,” and I had *NO* idea they didn’t actually get a mentally disabled person to play the part.)
‘Bot, Leo DiCaprio is the poster boy for metrosexuals. And other than Titanic, what successful movie has he starred in?
$100+ million isn’t what it used to be, but The Departed more than cleared that mark. Surprised to see The Aviator just got over the $100 million as well. As for budgets, though…
It’s because he didn’t go “full retard”.
He was fabulous in Gilbert Grape and pretty good in Catch Me If You Can, but other than that, I don’t like him much. I hated Titanic so much it tainted everyone in it for me. I also made the mistake of hearing an interview with him and he was such a little stuck up punk, treated the interviewer like trash. So he’s sunk for me. This is why if Johnny Depp shows up on TV, I run screaming from the room. I don’t wanna know any more about him than if he can act.
Interesting look at what ice core samples can tell us about global temperatures: