(and surely a hundred other movies)

-Guy

-Guy is sent by his team to infiltrate the bad guys while in disguise

-Guy has a thing for one of the girl bad guys

-Some of the bad guys are suspicious of Guy, and he has to prove himself to them despite the efforts of a bad guy who is also a Rival

-Big climactic sequence and Guy sides against his former team, saving his rival in the process (I don't know if this happens in Avatar but it probably will)

-Movie is **** but spawns big-budget sequels

It happens in Avatar.

I started to feel proud of myself, for predicting that, but then I just felt depressed.

South Park pretty much got it right. DANCES WITH SMURFS.

OOOH wow it's a story that's similar to other stories that have been told before. That means the movie is going to suck!

Shut up.

It's a JC movie

It's a CG movie.

Stick your head in a microwave

And then what?

Die

From microwaving your head

How would you close the door

Trust me, fast and furious isn't the first to use that storyline.

Really hard

That's what I figured, it's such a terrible movie it couldn't possibly have not been used already

Story telling is pretty old. Like really old.

I fail to see what bearing repeated stories have to do with anything.

Movies become books. Books become movies. Video games become movies. Movies become video games. Movies become movies 20 years later.

So the hell what? Something is either enjoyable, or not.

Seeing how this movie has spaceships, pretty CGI, mechs, aliens, and JC .. I'll probably like it.

Why bother compare it to the Fast? Compare it to ALIENS. Humans being used to exploit aliens. They fight.

Thank you!

There's only a limited number of stories that every movie, play, anything, can be tied back to. For example, "how to get home," using the same formula as Thrawn I could call Apollo 13 a ripoff of Homeward Bound as the story involves three characters who are trying to get home and encounter various problems to overcome, and there are families, worried, waiting for them back home.

Those have far less similarity

Don't forget I predicted there being a rival character who the hero rescues and wins over before even knowing about it

I'm not saying the movie is bad, it could be saved by good writing and characters. Although from the trailers it looks like a bunch of tools.

Star Wars fan on a Star Wars forum complaining about the overabundance of cliches in a science fiction film.

I would say that it looks like it might be a good action movie, except for the simplistic, heavy handed preachyness. Huge greedy cooperation with too much power doing bad things? Never heard of a movie with that message before. I can deal with a formulaic story in certain types of movies, but I really hate it when a director obtusely makes a point that has been made a million times before and thinks he's original and insightful for doing it. This definitely looks like one of those times.

That's certainly one way to read it. Of course, if you were so inclined it could also be interpreted as a message about the irresponsibility of a government using the military to support the carte blanche activities of the free market.

Or it's just a setting for a fun action movie. Ever see someone complain about Die Hard's heavy-handed message about huge corporations putting money ahead of its employees?

If this is as tongue-in-cheek silly as the original Star Wars movies were, I'm sure it'll be a delight.

rofl dances with smurfs

Well that's the point. If it were just a backdrop for a fun action movie it wouldn't matter, but I get the feeling that the director thinks his heavy-handed message is actually brilliant and insightful and it will end up ruining the movie. Die Hard wasn't really trying to make a big point. They just chose a heavy handed premise as an excuse to have Bruce Willis kick some ***.

The difference is that the die hard directors knew what kind of movie they were making. In this case, I get the feeling that James Cameron is blinded by his ego.



Again, that's not original and will feel very stupid in an action movie setting where everything is a black and white caricature. A movie that pits flawless protagonists against totally evil antagonists can't successfully make any worthwhile point. If the movie is designed to convey a poignant message, the movie will feel stupid if that message is stupid. Good action movies aren't designed to convey poignant messages.

Making a move that points out that the Nazism is bad would be stupid, because it's freaking obvious. A movie made about WWII should assume that point, not try to persuade the audience of its truth as if it was some profound insight.

First Blood.

And as it stands no one who has posted in this thread has seen the movie unless you were at Butt-Numb-A-Thon this weekend.

So, like I said before, just shut up.

We are all treating it like speculation. If your tiny mind can't comprehend what that implies, take it somewhere else, like you tube.

So you openly admit you're talking out your ***. Thank you.

Yes Antony, we openly admit that we're on a discussion forum discussing things.
You're welcome.

You have no idea what you're talking about. It's pointless. You might as well talk about what it looks like on the surface of Pluto.

We have more idea than you think, and if this discussion is annoying you so much, why not just refrain from reading it?

So you've seen the movie? If not then you have exactly the idea I think.

Unless you went to Avatar Day and saw a bunch of unfinished effects... then you still have no idea what you're talking about.

No idea at all? Wrong. Previews give you a pretty good general idea of the storyline and such things, and that is what brought on this discussion.
That's very different from talking about the surface of Pluto, as I've never seen a trailer for that at the cinema.
I don't know why you are so angry about this, but seriously, if you don't like a thread, don't read it. If you think it's pointless, don't waste your time in it.
So far we have had discussion and speculation, those aren't complete wastes of time. You coming in here and having a childish fit just because we're talking about something we don't know everything about, that's a waste of time.

Actually you can think and debate about the surface of Pluto based on evidence.
Same with the ****tiness of movies.

ah touche'
Either way, I'm still going to see Avatar, cliche != crap

Oh... so let's break this down. Avatar has the same basic storyline as The Fast and the Furious. TFatF had the same basic storyline as Point Break. Avatar has guys in mech suits. Aliens had a chick in a mech suit. Matrix Revolutions had guys in mech suits. Avatar has a jungle planet and they ride around on monsters. Episode 3 had a jungle planet and characters rode around on alien monsters. And it's a movie where a guy's conciousness is in another world just like the Matrix. And he becomes friends with the people he infiltrated.... oh wait... he didn't infiltrate them... they KNOW he's a human the WHOLE TIME.... but...

last but not least:

Avatar has Michelle Rodriguez in a small supporting role.

The Fast and the Furious has Michelle Rodriguez in a small supporting role.

What a total ****ing ripoff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't we know what it looks like on the surface of Pluto?

Kurt Vonneguts story graphs:
http://www.austinkleon.com/2005/12/17/graph-a-story-with-mr-vonnegut/

Haha! Do we? I dunno, I've never taken any interest.
I bet it is something that has at least heavily been discussed in interest though. Wonder if anyone went in there and said "this is pointless! You might as well be talking about Avatar!!!" or come to the bizarre conclusion that everyone in the thread must be saying the surface sucks.