Upon examination of other Na'vi images (not posted here, mostly group-shots)...I've determined that Na'vi females are basically topless. but what they appear to do is wear basically "really long necklaces with lots of large jewelry".....the old idea from the animated Tarzan that "it's impossible to see his gentals "accidentally" because we draw each frame". Similarly, whlle the Na'vi females seem to be topless, they...strategically place the jeweled necklaces in every shot at such an angle that they're still "covered" (which is possible because they're entirely CGI)
1) I remember this great comic book in which a girl, having just been turned into a mermaid, discovered that even she was topless, her hair would actually fall into place very properly, and in any situation.
2) I once wore a bustier. I had to pull it up the whole day, it was horrid. I never noticed my hair to try anything modest-y then.
3) Why do I keep seeing half-naked women in films, even in digital ones, and I never catch a glimpse of male genitalia? Really?
@NerD: Blattella: I'm starting to come around on Avatar. I thought the trailer was OK, but each still I see looks glorious. I may finally be getting excited for this film.
The only qualm i have this movie, despite the loads of other critcisms have been lobbed at it, is that michelle rodriguez is in it. I cannot God Damn stand her one bit, any movie she is in becomes neigh unwatchable for me
I'm not blown away at all by what I have seen, in fact it looks more like a kids movie than anything else, but James Cameron rarely lets people down, we should all remember that.
I'll reserve judgment until I see it in 3D in the theaters. Then it will be Judgment Day.
..you know, like in T2. Cause James Cameron directed it.
"I'll be back!" "Hasta la vista, baby!"
...bah, you kids and your noisy Hondas and Nintendo Wii's, you don't know nuthin'...
@NotGodot: as many have pointed out - the hype has been more about /how/ Avatar is being made than about it's characters/story...it's just goten jumbled on the interwebs
@goldfarb: Well what I mean is, setting aside the characters and story (which sound really generic) the actual look of it... it doesn't really impress. Sure, it's supposed to be this incredible jump in terms of mo-cap and shit, but at the end of the day the mo-cap characters still look like mo-cap characters, not especially more believable than, say, Gollum in Lord of the Rings.
I just don't get what all the fuss is about the technical "innovation" when to me it doesn't look like the new technology produces more convincingly rendered or integrated characters.
@NotGodot: well Cameron did design new cameras and a bunch of other stuff...that's what all the other filmmakers were hyped about...
and it's always down to the desingers and artists to determine what something looks like...I go through this all the time at work, I think it's wrong or looks bad, but it's 'what the director/producer/studio wants'...
Have I been taking crazy pills? Aside from the tails and blue skin, I've seen living breathing human beings who look more alien than these blue-painted expat Mohicans. Is no one else bothered by the fact that these 'aliens', which were so touted for their incredibly exotic nature, are the CG equivalent of Star Trek's green skinned moon princesses, with a generic "noble savage" cultural template?
Look, I get it, Cameron wants to re-do Dances with Wolves with furry catperson sex, and the CG is pretty slick, but could we stop trying to hail this as some sort of super-original sci-fi epic and recognize it as the derivative generic scifi story that it is?
@I Think We're Property: No,be fair, they wernt hyping the design, they were hypeing the technology.
Its not a "Cloverfield monster" of blandness and overhype, more a general lack of imagination. (or fear the public wont associate well with things too unhuman...which of course, is nonsense).
What exactly am I looking at in photo #2? Is that her tail in between her legs or her arm? It looks like her right arm is back behind her holding a knife? WTF?
10/01/09
Just me? WELL TIME WILL TELL.
I'm first to call the "Hey, The Na'vi all look like genetic clones of Brendan Fraser" quip.
Brendan Fraser. Na'vi. See it. True.
10/02/09
10/01/09
10/01/09
10/01/09
@CodenameV: in the Avatar Day footage she leans way over and before she gets up...I've seen everything...
10/02/09
10/02/09
1) I remember this great comic book in which a girl, having just been turned into a mermaid, discovered that even she was topless, her hair would actually fall into place very properly, and in any situation.
2) I once wore a bustier. I had to pull it up the whole day, it was horrid. I never noticed my hair to try anything modest-y then.
3) Why do I keep seeing half-naked women in films, even in digital ones, and I never catch a glimpse of male genitalia? Really?
10/02/09
which will get you an R rating faster than just about anything...
10/01/09
[io9.com]
I'm reposting cause I'm lazy like that.
This movie can't come soon enough.
10/01/09
10/01/09
10/01/09
10/01/09
I HATE HATE HATE her.
10/02/09
10/01/09
10/01/09
10/01/09
I'll reserve judgment until I see it in 3D in the theaters. Then it will be Judgment Day.
..you know, like in T2. Cause James Cameron directed it.
"I'll be back!" "Hasta la vista, baby!"
...bah, you kids and your noisy Hondas and Nintendo Wii's, you don't know nuthin'...
10/01/09
None of them really seem like the quantum leap forward that it's being hyped as.
10/01/09
10/01/09
I just don't get what all the fuss is about the technical "innovation" when to me it doesn't look like the new technology produces more convincingly rendered or integrated characters.
10/01/09
and it's always down to the desingers and artists to determine what something looks like...I go through this all the time at work, I think it's wrong or looks bad, but it's 'what the director/producer/studio wants'...
10/01/09
They look too real, and don't move real enough. They're right in the Uncanny Valley.
10/01/09
Hoping springs eternal though, maybe I'll be proven wrong.
10/01/09
10/01/09
Look, I get it, Cameron wants to re-do Dances with Wolves with furry catperson sex, and the CG is pretty slick, but could we stop trying to hail this as some sort of super-original sci-fi epic and recognize it as the derivative generic scifi story that it is?
10/01/09
Its not a "Cloverfield monster" of blandness and overhype, more a general lack of imagination. (or fear the public wont associate well with things too unhuman...which of course, is nonsense).
10/01/09
10/01/09
10/01/09