Avatar movie

[Turbinator]

The "true 3D" technology where you wont need any glasses, or double vision projections is about 15 years away from commercial use. Right now it is in it's infancy. So there is no way around the focus thing yet.

 

[Sky Captain]

Today I saw Avatar in 3D. The visual effects were absolutely awesome with some really nice nerdy touches like the red hot glowing radiators on Venture Star (just name me another sci fi movie in which spaceships has operational radiators), beeping bulldozers when in reverse, AMP suit engine exhausts. Too bad the space shots were so brief and did`t show the shuttle reentry. Besides Venture Star would make a nice interstellar ship for Orbiter especially since we lack realistic interstellar vessels.

Although I did`t like the ending. Does anyone else think that giving a bunch of really pissed off corporate goons access to orbital shuttle and antimatter torchship (and they also should have an antimatter manufacturing plant somewhere out there to refuel the ship) is BAD IDEA?

 

[Turbinator]

We get to see what happens in Avatar 2 and 3. A trilogy has been confirmed. Maybie we get to see more Aliens style Space Marine action in the next movie.

 

[T.Neo]

(just name me another sci fi movie in which spaceships has operational radiators)

Some Star Wars ships had them I believe.

But they were not particularly realistic. :thumbsdown:

...since we lack realistic interstellar vessels.

We also (for the most part) lack realistic interstellar travel, so interstellar vessels are generally "restricted".

I'm still waiting for a planetologically accurate exosystem for Orbiter...

 

[JamesG]

The warp nacelles on StarTrek ships have radiators on them, or at least glowy bits that are as radiator-like as the Avatar ship's are.

 

[T.Neo]

The Venture Star is actually pretty realistic for a sci-fi vessel, or so I've read.

The shuttles, notsomuch. I'm not too sure about full VTOL capability. STOVL and a runway (!) should do fine.

 

[Richy]

Maybe it's the planet which lets the shuttles be realistic. I mean we're talking about a much denser atmosphere with much less gravity.

On earth, the shuttle may need a runway, but on pandora it may have full VTOL capabilities. (see it has wheels, and not just skids)

 

[T.Neo]

Indeed, but I still think VTOL is overkill.

 

[Sky Captain]

I think it was said somewhere in the background materials Pandora gravity is about 80 % Earth gravity and has slightly denser atmosphere. Also guessing from how things fall it could be about right since there were no noticeable difference compared to normal Earth gravity.

Regarding shuttle VTOL capabilities I think it`s plausible, keep in mind the huge Venture Star were capable of accelerating at 1.5 G for months until it achieved cruise velocity so having a shuttle that can hover is rather trivial.

Thoughts about shuttle

It`s engines seemed somewhat weird they were clearly airbreathing. Maybe they were supposed to be some sort of hybrid jet-rocket engines that uses air as reaction mass when in atmosphere to conserve onboard propellant. The jetblast coming from them seemed far too weak to support the large shuttle on hover. In one shot the big red dragon flew nearly under the shuttle with no bad things happening. Also when shuttle hovered close to ground to deploy troops it just caused a strong wind like a chopper. In reality those troops together with nearby jungle would be thrown through the air burned and killed especially since the boarding ramp were very close to rear engines.

When shuttle crashed it would caused a nuclear disaster since there is no way it could be chemically powered.

The shuttle clearly did`t have an engine out capability when on hover which is bad especially when considering it`s most likely nuclear powered. If engine fails when hovering over mining base it would crash and catastrofically irradiate the whole base.

 

[T.Neo]

I'd imagine that the reactor would have a safety mechanism.

 

[Sky Captain]

It`s possible although designing a Gigawatt range reactor that`s light enough to be usable on spacecraft, be meltdown resistant and strong enough to survive crash without turning into huge dirty bomb would be very difficult.

 

[Ghostrider]

Well, I've seen the movie yesterday and my take is: I don't care if the story has been done before, because the execution rocks the synapses like a trip through SkyNet's chronoport machine.

Visually it's stunning - reminded me a bit of the planet Na Pali from the game Unreal - and the experience made me feel a bit like the first time I saw Star Wars: as if the director was grabbing me by the back of my neck, throwing me down a deep pit filled with fantastic stuff, then punched me in the nose while screaming "yo, who's number one? WHO'S NUMBER ONE?" into my ears.

I really don't see where the whole "anti-American, anti-militaristic, anti-technology" stuff comes from. The hero and many of the "good" characters are American, and the protagonist is clearly a soldier who identifies deeply with the Marine Corps' creed. The antagonists are clearly hired guns with little respect for dress code, and the main antagonist is corporate greed (as in Aliens). Even the Big Bad with a military background is so badass to be almost admirable in a twisted way.

The technology is not an enemy either, because without the Avatar tech the Na'Vi wouldn't have Jack Sully on their part and that would have been bad. Rather, tech is neutral in Cameron's movies: like the Terminators, it can be used for good and bad purposes.

Ultimately, it's down to choices: Sully was meant to provide info on the Na'Vi, and at one point he decides to provide them to the Na'Vi along with his experience. I think everyone can at one point identify with the Na'Vi (in our history we've all been repressed by some superior foe, more or less, and then kicked him into the nether regions with a vengeance).

The underlying morale (which I approve of, incidentally) seems to be: there ain't no problem on this world or anywhere else that cannot be solved by the massive and deliberate use of guns, explosives and wholesale violence.

 

[Suzy]

NASA Flickr photos: James Cameron meets Charles Bolden

 

[doggie015]

FINALLY watched Avatar today! And I can see why it won Movie of the year; the plot is very well done and the effects are nothing short of AWESOME! I will definitely be getting it on DVD when it comes out in AU!

 

[orbiterizmad]

Is ANYBODY gonna actually make some ships like the "Scorpion Gunship" and the "Venture Star"?? P.S BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME!!! and all the people that said it was bad have no sense of how great the movie is.

 

[cljohnston]

So nice to see people who actually enjoyed the movie for what it was, the experience of being in that world, rather than whining about the "unoriginality" of the story!

When I was 8, I was taken to see Steve McQueen's Le Mans, and it was the most amazing thing I'd ever seen! Saw it more times in the theater than I ever did Star Wars, and another couple hundred times on DVD (wore out one player!).
When it came out, the critics panned it as having "no story", but it's really about the experience of being in the race.
Now, it's widely regarded as the best racing movie ever made.

 

[Izack]

I didn't go see it because I can't stand 3D movies.
Any chance of it coming out on DVD, or is that too obsolete now? :dry:

 

[T.Neo]

Are you sure it was only in 3d, everywhere?

AFAIK the 3d version was/is only being shown in selected theaters.

 

[orb]

In the theater where I was, it was displayed in 3D and 2D in parallel for different audiences, with slightly different ticket price between 2D and 3D version. Of course more people chose 3D, despite it was more expensive.

 

[Izack]

I only saw advertisements/listings for the movie in 3D.
After reading some of the posts here I figure the only reason I'd want to see it would be to see the Venture Star and space scenes.
A good motto is 'if you can't make the plot sound good with words, it's not a good plot.'