duckroll said:What are the expectations for the 5th weekend? 40 million? 35 million?
Id say 50 million for the 4 day weekendgdt5016 said:Probably around $40-45, it's a 4day holiday weekend.
Dead said:Id say 50 million for the 4 day weekend
gdt5016 said:Probably around $40-45, it's a 4day holiday weekend.
MLKSolo said:What holiday?
jason10mm said:Damn, who gets 4 days for MLK? Well, the line unit here is, due to a training holiday, but still..
Anyway, interesting discussion on the Na'vi and the messages of Avatar. I've read the "Avatar Sourcebook" or whatever it was and while it doesn't go into exhaustive detail on the Na'vi culture, I've developed my own theroy, which seems in line with the original script quoted above.
I think the Na'vi are SLAVES to Eywa. They seem to lack some critical elements of ambition, modivation, and a need for self-improvement. Their society seems very static and their environment provides a meager subsistence-level amount of resources. Granted, due to the mild climate they seem to be able to live quite well without clothing, real shelter, and food storage, and the bio-network can replace the need for permanent information storage systems, but I find it almost impossible to believe that no Na'vi experience greed, jealousy, or hate to the point where strife isn't more common or that they couldn't be exploited by the RDA. Surely ornamental trinkets, food, or steel/ceramic weaponry would be of use to them.
But of course Eywa stops this type of thinking, making the Na'vi little more than semi-sentient care-takers of the environment. Eywa doesn't want technology to develop, it doesn't want the Na'vi to progress to a point where they can see through Eywa and exploit resources at their own pace. Of course Eywa's method seems stable and much more maintainable than the human way, but it seems like the Na'vi have no choice in the decision process.
Avatar isn't so much "white-guilt" or anti-capitalist, in my opinion, as it is almost a celebratrion of the concepts of the pastoral fantasy and the noble savage. It is anti-urban, and clearly it touches many folks who feel that they have "lost" something for not doing more stuff outside. The Na'vi are savage, but reflect a compassion and strength of character not seen in many of the humans (supplanted by greed, cowardice, etc). We see this same sentiment cast upon Native American tribes; rather than blood-thirsty raiders they become full of quiet dignity, reserved control, and only respond to insults initiated by the crass, arrogant outsider.
I can watch the film and be drawn in, fully caring for Jake and the Na'vi, while at the same time realizing and accepting that where I on Pandora, I'd be riding in a mech gunning the blue bastards downThe drive for unobtanium and the uses it has for a failing humanity would overshadow my respect for Pandora.
Jibril said:The Vatican says Avatar is stupid:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100112/ap_en_mo/eu_vatican_avatar
duckroll said:Where? I don't see a single line indicating that the movie is "stupid".
Jibril said:Paraphrasing![]()
duckroll said:I don't see any line which can remotely be paraphrased to suggest that there is any intention to say the movie is stupid or even dumb. The article clearly expresses that the story is somewhat "bland" which is to say it is unoriginal, but where does it express that it is dumb or stupid?
The marketplace expands for the holiday weekends. There will be room for Eli'sduckroll said:50 million again even with competition from the great Gary Whitta? I dunno...
no it's preaty much white guilt, not only about it, but it is certanly a big part of itAvatar isn't so much "white-guilt"
Jibril said:The Vatican says Avatar is stupid:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100112/ap_en_mo/eu_vatican_avatar
Seems like it. It should be at over $1.6b by the end of the week. One or two (at most) weeks after that and it's #1.duckroll said:So basically, at the rate Avatar is going, by the end of Jan it'll be #1 worldwide, and all of Feb will be the countdown to it getting over 600 million domestically?
Enosh said:no it's preaty much white guilt, not only about it, but it is certanly a big part of it
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?I was troubled that the movie builds up to a lengthy sequence in which the audience cheers as former U.S. military personnel are graphically slaughtered, including a scene in which the blue avatar of Jake Sully, the protagonist, machine-guns some soldiers in the back. Edward Boyce of Sydney, Australia, writes, "You asked, 'When did watching depictions of U.S. soldiers dying become a form of fun?' Part of the answer is that the U.S. military is unpopular outside its home country, and Hollywood blockbusters cater to an international market. Avatar's earnings in its first three weeks were $352 million in North America and $673 million in the rest of the world. I can't explain why American audiences pay to see their soldiers blown up. But in the international market, dead American soldiers are appealing, and Hollywood is only too happy to oblige."
Finally this from Trey Lindsey of Dallas: "I am a member of the U.S. military and I felt like I was taking crazy pills while watching that movie with my wife and son. I sat wide-eyed and appalled as the rest of the audience actually applauded as U.S. Marines -- whether they were mercenaries seems irrelevant, they were referred to as Marines, called themselves Marines and wore Marine-style uniforms -- were slaughtered on camera. I watched Avatar in Nashville, a historically conservative city located near a major Army base that is home to one of the legendary units that liberated Europe in World War II, the 101st Airborne. There is a graveyard in France full of men who once lived near Nashville and who died opposing fascist tyranny. But to Hollywood, U.S. soldiers are evil and deserved to be slaughtered as audiences cheer."
He was obviously sitting in a theater full of libruls, or maybe even illegal immigrants.Count Dookkake said:Interesting how the rest of the audience could applaud, despite being near a base in a conservative city...
But those are Mercenaries. I guess Mercenaries and US soldiers are synonymous to the dude.XiaNaphryz said:Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
XiaNaphryz said:Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
Count Dookkake said:Sounds like that dude should be taking crazy pills if he doesn't see a difference between US military and mercenary forces.
What a douche.
Interesting how the rest of the audience could applaud, despite being near a base in a conservative city...
Don't let that guy watch The Rock.XiaNaphryz said:Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
XiaNaphryz said:Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
lolwhether they were mercenaries seems irrelevant
Jibril said:But those are Mercenaries. I guess Mercenaries and US soldiers are synonymous to the dude.![]()
Some of it is actually mentioned earlier in the same article, right before the quote I posted:ShOcKwAvE said:Yeah, did I miss that part of the movie? I thought it was a private security force the company was paying. Were they really military members?
I objected that it wasn't clear whether the fatigue-clad warriors who slaughter Pandorans were regular military or a private army, noting the noble helicopter pilot -- the sole sympathetic military character -- is addressed as "Marine." Many readers, including Sharon Gunzelmann of Tulsa, Okla., countered, "Once a Marine, always a Marine. It is an honorific that stays with you after you leave the service, the way a former judge is always addressed as 'Judge.'" Andrew Whitford of Darlington, Australia, felt it was clear the people in question were mercenaries, if ex-military
Pffft, that time's for getting the last condiments for your food and snacks obviously!Count Dookkake said:JAKE FUCKING SAYS THEY ARE MERCENARIES IN THE FIRST 5 FUCKING MINUTES OF THE MOVIE.
Jibril said:The Vatican says Avatar is stupid:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100112/ap_en_mo/eu_vatican_avatar
:lolThe Vatican newspaper and radio station have called the film "Avatar" simplistic, and criticized it for flirting with modern doctrines that promote the worship of nature as a substitute for religion.
Count Dookkake said:JAKE FUCKING SAYS THEY ARE MERCENARIES IN THE FIRST 5 FUCKING MINUTES OF THE MOVIE.
icarus-daedelus said:The dumbest thing about that is that the "worship of nature" depicted in the film is not a modern doctrine; it is in fact animism, a type of religion which is handily older than monotheism and polytheism combined.
XiaNaphryz said:Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
XiaNaphryz said:Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
In cultural news, is the mega-hyped forthcoming movie "Avatar" a cartoon? Television advertising has begun -- the material is so obviously phony, it makes "Clifford the Big Red Dog" seem like realism. There are video games whose content looks less bogus than "Avatar" -- the ads basically shout the words "faked using a computer." "Avatar" appears to be the work of animators -- manga disguised as a movie. All the hype, all the money -- what if this flick becomes the new "Heaven's Gate"?
What I find amusing in all this is how the film goes out of its way to establish this. You've got the military side dismissing it as religious gobbledygook, and the scientists saying, well no actually it's biology. And the movie goes on to demonstrate that. It's decidedly not religious.icarus-daedelus said:The main subjects of animism are definitely real, tangible things, so that would put it in a slightly different class from the invisible sky wizard religions of the modern day. But usually in animism a spiritual aspect is given to humans, animals, plants, rocks, rivers, etc. and the world is considered a sacred place (rather than simply a stepping stone to a better life - another difference from monotheism) so it is a type of religion, even if it is one focused on things that provably exist. I'm guessing it's that aspect that upsets the Vatican.