James Cameron Begins His Deep-Sea Dive 162
James Cameron is on his way down. The director's long-planned trip to the deepest spot on Earth — the Mariana Trench's Challenger Deep — is in progress; by the time you read this, if all goes well, Cameron will be navigating around in depths unvisited since 1960. National Geographic's coverage of the dive is excellent as well, as is the BBC's (with video).
Good luck maybe. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Good luck maybe. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Good luck maybe. (Score:5, Insightful)
That wouldn't be so bad since the aliens in The Abyss seemed to be quite benevolent at the end of the film.
Unless I missed the sequel where they drowned everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Waterworld?
One thing I don't need to look up - that one's not by Michael Bay. Even he isn't dumb enough to try and make water explode.
Re:Good luck maybe. (Score:5, Funny)
STOP. GIVING. HIM. IDEAS.
Re:Good luck maybe. (Score:4, Informative)
that one's not by Michael Bay. Even he isn't dumb enough to try and make water explode.
AWESOME POOL! [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
They drown everyone first in the special edition.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is not terrible with the complete ending.
Re:Good luck maybe. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good luck maybe. (Score:5, Funny)
Drugs were better back then.
Can't wait for the footage (Score:3)
One of my "If I was a billionaire" fantasies was a documentary trip back to the trench. Amazing that it's taken this long to get back.
Re:Can't wait for the footage (Score:5, Funny)
One of my "If I was a billionaire" fantasies was a documentary trip back to the trench.
Noble, but for me its two chicks at the same time (deadpan). It used to only take a million$ to set that up but with inflation and all...
Re:Can't wait for the footage (Score:4, Funny)
Lawrence, is that you?
Re:Can't wait for the footage (Score:4, Funny)
For only a couple of thousand more you can skip inflation and go with silicone.
Re: (Score:2)
2) Reiser4 is alive and well, and should be in mainline "real soon now".
That's neat! (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally think that deep trenches are at least as interesting as outer space, if not even more so. There is a rich flora and fauna which have evolved to adapt to the high pressure and lack of sunlight and oxygen at such depths, it almost makes them seem like species that are alien to this planet.
Unfortunately, travelling and exploring the the murky depths are prohibitively expensive for the average guy. A small excursion itself would cost about $40,000, so I would imagine that James Camerons trip is going to cost several hundred thousand dollars. Ah, I envy the rich. :)
Anyway, here's to hoping that he gets excellent clips.
Re: (Score:3)
I personally think that deep trenches are at least as interesting as outer space.
Interesting, certainly, inspiring? No. The possibilities of space are (cough) endless. Once you get to the bottom of the trench, you're pretty much done. Can't live there, nothing of immediate value there, much harder to sustain a colony there than outer space.
Not saying we shouldn't visit the trenches too, just that I don't think it warrants as much attention or investment as outer space.
Re:That's neat! (Score:4, Insightful)
Trenches are capable of supporting carbon based life forms, some of which we are yet to discover. Some of which might prove incredible useful in build subs that can withstand such pressure, or be useful for building some sort of night vision. The possibilities of what we can discover, that can be of direct use for mankind and the accessibility, in my opinion, makes deep sea exploration more useful than space.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree there is certain bio-research that should be done, not only in the Challenger Deep, but also across the floor of the Gulf of Mexico and any number of other under-explored areas.
More useful than space? Dunno, I like my satellite communication, GPS and weather imagery, and the military loves their ICBMs. An awful lot of deep sea exploration is supported by space based tech today.
We're still mucking about in near-Earth orbit about 99% of the time (because that's where the immediately useful stuff is,
This is what he's actually good at (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Forget Avatar and Titanic... this is the kind of stuff he will be remembered for.
Ah, remembered for? Ha, no not quite. You give far too much faith in society today.
There is no arguing what a certain man has done to advance deep-sea exploration way before overzealous directors started showboating, looking for their next "extreme" shot behind the camera.
Now, I challenge you to find anyone under the age of 30 who knows who Jacques Cousteau is.
Re: (Score:2)
I know he hears bells in random order, deep beneath the perfect water.
Re:This is what he's actually good at (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, he was the Pink Panther detective.
Re: (Score:2)
I loved the old "Undersea" series, but I don't associate Cousteau with deep sea exploration. Yea, he had that saucer that could go down a ways, but he was mostly about reef and wreck diving (and talking with that cool French accent).
Of course this isn't about science, it's just a rich guy's publicity whoring stunt. There's no need to send a manned vehicle that deep when robots can do the job better. Several unmanned vehicles have been to the bottom of the Mariana Trench over the past couple of decades.
Re:This is what he's actually good at (Score:4, Funny)
Re:This is what he's actually good at (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah... you get to be 23. Now get of my lawn and go nail a college student.
Re: (Score:3)
This is slashdot, the average reader does not know much about seduction except through biology books... the closest he'll ever get to nail a college student is if he takes a hammer, nails & bangs towards the wall :)... praying he actually manages to aim in the right direction... he could probably build a robot that will do that with precision though maybe even imitate a woman :)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm 23 and I know who Jacques Cousteau is. Do I get a prize?
Yes, there is a check waiting at ./ HQ for one million dollars. It is made out to "Anonymous Coward". Just show your ID at the door.
Er, wait, what? What do you mean 2 million people showed up to collect the prize? What the hell man, how many people are named Anonymous Coward around here?!?
Re: (Score:2)
Cool rich guy (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as rich guys hobbies go, this is way cooler than buying a fighter jet or trying to get a monopoly on fighting HIV in Africa.
Re:Cool rich guy (Score:5, Informative)
But not quite as cool as planning on retiring to Mars.
Re:Cool rich guy (Score:4, Funny)
As far as rich guys hobbies go, this is way cooler than buying a fighter jet or trying to get a monopoly on fighting HIV in Africa.
But not quite as cold as planning on retiring to Mars.
Fixed that for you!
Re: (Score:2)
or trying to get a monopoly on fighting HIV in Africa.
Who is trying to do that?
Re: (Score:2)
He means Bill Gates, though I don't his dig about 'monopoly'. Say what you will about Bill Gates the OS monopolist, but the Gates Foundation has done very good work. Comparing Gates' and Cameron's use of their fortunes is like comparing apples and oranges. Different, but both good in their own right.
Re:Cool rich guy (Score:5, Informative)
He means Bill Gates, though I don't his dig about 'monopoly'. Say what you will about Bill Gates the OS monopolist, but the Gates Foundation has done very good work.
I happen to have many friends working in NGOs in developing countries and I'm getting the same feedback over and over: the Gates Foundation is like a bulldozer that rolls over all the "competition" and forces people to do things their way. The foundation also has close ties to Monsanto and is pushing around the small organizations that disagree with their vision of "green development".
I guess you have access to Google, it's worth a quick search.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You know what, I imagine it probably does take "bulldozing" to overcome the entrenched existing entities in order to do Really Big Effective Things.
If it takes hurting some feelings to ELIMINATE Polio and Malaria forever (!!), and who knows what other diseases in the coming decades, then that seems fine to me. Polio has been eliminated in India. I'm pretty sure all the millions of children saved aren't too concerned about the fact that Bill Gates is in a bit of hurry to get things done.
Re: (Score:2)
I work with a lot of charities around the world, and all of the big charities have their own way of doing things and refuse to work with you if you want to go your own way - its just the way they are.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an interesting take on it. How exactly do they do that? Most (not all) of the criticism I've seen boils down to either a conspiracy, or anti-science nonsense, like from anti-vaccine or anti-genetic engineering groups (and speaking of which, corporations aside, I hope that concept isn't the source of the disagreement about 'green development'). I happen to know someone who has been around the world doing a lot of work in his field in developing countries. I'll have to see what he thinks.
Have at it, Cammy. (Score:2)
Couldn't do it; I have a pretty severe phobia of pressurized things. That scene from 'The Abyss', where the villain's ship goes down too far and... *shivers* Everyone at work pokes fun at me every time we have to change the fountain soda machine's carbon tanks, because I take off to the side room to steer clear. I came close to whaling on the bosses' son for taking a nearly-empty one, bring it over where I was and spurt out at me.
Re:Have at it, Cammy. (Score:5, Funny)
Can't take the pressure hu?
Re: (Score:2)
Can he take... (Score:5, Funny)
Can he take George Lucas with him, and leave him at the bottom?
Re:Can he take... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Can he take... (Score:5, Funny)
Weigh him down with a couple of steel Jar-Jar Binks statues. That way a couple hundred years from now people will know why.
Re: (Score:2)
Glory and Honor to Senator Binks of Naboo!
Reminds me of the old days (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the old days, the government didn't have the resources, or the vision, to fund most valuable research.
I'm not sure the trench counts as valuable science, science certainly, but more valuable as PR.
The New Adventurers (Score:5, Interesting)
The rich men are at it again. Some are going into outer space. Some are going under the ocean. I can't wait for the earth explorers, digging down deep into the crust.
He's already on the bottom (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
This is now the official "Lowest Tweet Ever"
And I thought Twitter couldn't sink any lower...
So for all us Titanic haters... (Score:5, Funny)
Does this mean that Titanic is no longer the lowest point in James Cameron's career?
Re:So for all us Titanic haters... (Score:5, Funny)
Well... (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't just being the deepest point in the ocean make it worth exploring?
Maybe not. I mean, yeah, I'll probably stare in awe at Cameron's video footage of the seafloor, thinking of the 10,900 meter water column above and of how this is the single patch of seafloor that endures a higher water pressure than any other patch of seafloor anywhere else. But from a scientific standpoint it might have been better if he'd visited some place that's only, say, 8,000 meters deep, but is located in the vicinity of some deep-sea volcano, hydrothermal vent or other geologically interesting feature, thus making it more likely to find many living creatures or other interesting things there.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
The test dives all went well past the 8,000 meter mark and I'm sure the sponsors wanted the deepest point moniker attached to the venture. There are many mountains more challenging to climb than Everest but everyone want to go to the highest none the less.
All along he's said that it's about the science and having reached the deepest point I'm sure they'll be visiting those places that maximise the science. James Cameron says he does not want this dive to the deep to be a one-off, and wants to use it as a platform for ocean exploration. [bbc.co.uk]
Having reached the deepest point there is no where marked off limits and there are several other ventures out there on the same Race to the bottom of the Ocean [bbc.co.uk] quest.
Re: (Score:2)
Rumor is his next movie is going to be called "Voyage to See What's on the Bottom", which kinda means he really does need to reach the Bottom.
Now it can be told (Score:2)
Constructed in secret, Cameron's undersea craft is really propelled by a Johnson outboard motor [washingtonpost.com].
He is back to the surface now (Score:2)
Litterbug! (Score:3)
From http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/03/120325-james-cameron-mariana-trench-challenger-deep-deepest-science-sub/ [nationalgeographic.com] ..."is to jettison steel weights attached to the sub and shoot back to the surface."
Can't we go anywhere and follow the "Leave No Trace" ethos? What effect will those weights have on the local ecosystem?
- Jasen.
Oil (Score:2)
places 50 years for 2nd manned visit (Score:2)
(2) South Pole after the big 1911 race
(3) The Moon looks like at least 50 years (40 already)
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of one Michael Caine's most brilliant ripostes. When asked about what he thought of Jaws 4, he replied "I have never seen the film, but by all accounts it was terrible. However I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific."
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
What level of sophistication is even required to dislike Avatar, or the Indy-butt-raping scandal that was his last attempt at Indiana Jones, Jumping the Shark?
I just love the fact he took a famous chick-flick and turned it 3D so he could force a ton of guys out there to take women to see that movie all over again, at prices greater than the original ticket price. Although, in that situation there could be a silver lining.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
He made a movie that had a lot of elements that the masses enjoy. (action, etc)
He created a sci fi world with at least some effort at plausibility. (not all of it, but some details were there, for instance Jake suffering muscle weakness after prolonged time in the tank)
The reason the "indians" won was because the entire planet was a biological entity that could defend itself, by mobilizing all resources against the human invaders. It was never actually an underdog story : the planet has vastly superior technology and numbers to the human invaders (the brain transfers shown at the end of the movie were obviously extremely high tech), but the humans couldn't perceive it.
Anyways, sure it ripped stuff off, but compare it to the competition. And, the film did use some of the best visual effects ever seen. Stop being a snob : would you rather all movies were some low budget indie film that tries to "make a point" but it's hard to figure out what it is because the movie was made in someone's garage? To make a movie with an enormous budget, an enormous number of people have to watch it, and you have to make the story accessible to them.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
...the movie was made in someone's garage?
Wayne's World! Party on!
Re: (Score:2)
would you rather all movies were some low budget indie film that tries to "make a point" but it's hard to figure out what it is because the movie was made in someone's garage?
And worse, if it does make a point, the point is something as inane as, "we are all different" or "life is pain" or "sometimes endings aren't happy." Rare to find real insight in art, even if it is Indy.
Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)
He created a sci fi world with at least some effort at plausibility.
Oh, c'mon! Where the frig in the Periodic Table does one find "Unobtanium"? Seriously? I heard that, and gave up on the flick from that point on.
The reason the "indians" won was because the entire planet was a biological entity that could defend itself, by mobilizing all resources against the human invaders
Entity, meet biological warfare (easily possible, given the ease with which the DNA was replicated) and a gaggle of large asteroids being flung at the surface just for good measure (also possible, given the massive energy require to go FTL (or was it near-light?) speeds in the first place). There's at least half a dozen ways, given that story's tech, in which to destroy the inhabitants without harming the material, endangering a single human being, and basically turning the place into an airless rock that can be strip-mined.
Seriously... good visual effects (easily give it that), but the story had more holes in it than a sieve.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Or are you claiming that because we haven't discovered it yet, it doesn't exist? In a science fiction movie. Really? Really?
As for orbital bombardment... That's probably the part the Cameron didn't show. Humans go down to the surface and try to strip-mine politely because of politics. Think of the PR win that it would be for the (then current) administration if they can convince these primitive creatures to live/act like humans! But now that we're kicked off planet, time to warm up the nukes.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like naming them after places, why single us out? Ytterby, Sweden has four elements named after it.
(Posted from Berkeley).
Re: (Score:2)
There's at least half a dozen ways, given that story's tech, in which to destroy the inhabitants without harming the material, endangering a single human being, and basically turning the place into an airless rock that can be strip-mined.
As was explained in the film, "killing the indigenous looks bad."
The Na'vi as an advanced, post-industrial society. (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, c'mon! Where the frig in the Periodic Table does one find "Unobtanium"? Seriously? I heard that, and gave up on the flick from that point on.
I figured Unobtainium to be some sort of ClarkeTech-level meta-material, much like the Cavorite in A Deepness in the Sky. In that story, Cavorite was a mineral discovered by the native Spider civilization, possessing miraculous anti-gravity properties Yet it was composed of nothing more than common elements, mostly diamonoid carbon, that should have yielded an unremarkable pile of dust. In that story, it was insinuated that the material was not naturally occuring, but the legacy of some hyper-advanced intelligence or civilization.
The implication being that the Na'vi were not a primitive pre-industrial society -- but a primitive post-industrial one. The planet-wide bio-net and cooperative defense system doesn't make sense from a Darwinian evolutionary standpoint, but it might have made sense if it was designed that way. And those Unobtanium "ore" formations? Perhaps the remains of some ancient server farm or energy storage-facility... or garbage dump.
Entity, meet biological warfare (easily possible, given the ease with which the DNA was replicated) and a gaggle of large asteroids being flung at the surface just for good measure (also possible, given the massive energy require to go FTL (or was it near-light?) speeds in the first place). There's at least half a dozen ways, given that story's tech, in which to destroy the inhabitants without harming the material, endangering a single human being, and basically turning the place into an airless rock that can be strip-mined.
In the aftermath of Avatar's release, I found similar viewpoints all too common among my fellow nerds. It bothers me to think that we can consider genocide to be the "obvious" solution, and that not resorting to total war at the get-go as being the mark of a plot hole.
The corporate managers in Avatar weren't actually evil, but merely self-serving and cynical. They told themselves it was ok because they weren't really doing anything evil -- just moving some stubborn natives somewhere less inconvenient. I'm sure after the orders were given, they told themselves that it was the natives who forced them to act as they did, their superstitious and ignorant natures prevented the savages from listening to reason.
In any case, we often forget that the humans were employees of a corporation, not a sovereign military force. The soldiers were the equivalent of some Blackwater mercenaries. Regardless of how powerful corporations sometimes seem, it is government who still holds the leash, being jealous entities that hold the best goodies (like WMDs) for themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
much like the Cavorite in A Deepness in the Sky.
And, in another show of useless pedantry, I have to note that Vinge named his material Cavorite as a homage to Wells who used the name in his 1901 book The First Men in the Moon [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
In any case, we often forget that the humans were employees of a corporation, not a sovereign military force. The soldiers were the equivalent of some Blackwater mercenaries. Regardless of how powerful corporations sometimes seem, it is government who still holds the leash, being jealous entities that hold the best goodies (like WMDs) for themselves.
That's not really accurate. You're looking at a fantastically expensive operation that is seeking to get an incredibly valuable substance and which is a very long way from home. There have been such things in the past on Earth (e.g., during the age of sail) though to a lesser extent; Earth just isn't as hostile as all that. The history of such expeditions is that they are not run as democracies, but rather as dictatorships with theoretical overview from back home, though typically as long as the goods are d
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
He created a sci fi world with at least some effort at plausibility.
Oh, c'mon! Where the frig in the Periodic Table does one find "Unobtanium"? Seriously? I heard that, and gave up on the flick from that point on.
Unobtainium: well, why not call it Carbon, formed in large quantities into some kind of useful room-temperature superconductor (or other highly valuable commodity) by processes unique to the formation of Pandora. Sure you could synthesize it, but it's cheaper to go dig it up. The miracle of Unobtainum was irrelevant to the plot beyond the fact it was valuable and they had to take down HomeTree to get it. Any time wasted explaining what Unobtainium was good for is just pandering to a very small percentage of the audience, a small percentage with relatively little influence over ticket buyers, apparently.
The reason the "indians" won was because the entire planet was a biological entity that could defend itself, by mobilizing all resources against the human invaders
Entity, meet biological warfare (easily possible, given the ease with which the DNA was replicated) and a gaggle of large asteroids being flung at the surface just for good measure (also possible, given the massive energy require to go FTL (or was it near-light?) speeds in the first place). There's at least half a dozen ways, given that story's tech, in which to destroy the inhabitants without harming the material, endangering a single human being, and basically turning the place into an airless rock that can be strip-mined.
Seriously... good visual effects (easily give it that), but the story had more holes in it than a sieve.
Yeah, and the U.S. could have nuked Afghanistan and Iraq into oblivion, as well as any upstarts like Iran or North Korea who would have chirped about it. Maybe, just maybe, there were political implications back home that prevented waging all-out war on obviously sentient beings that are absolutely no threat to us, and whose only crime is sitting on something valuable.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the US can't nuke any country (no matter how obnoxious) because Russia and China would object and it would result in a full scale nuclear war. None of the big nuclear powers want to allow that precedent to be set, and I'm sure that has been clearly communicated by secret channels even if it is not public. Those countries would have to piss off all the nuclear powers in order to get nuked, and even the craziest ones are careful to maintain friendship with at least one of them.
Yeah, and the U.S. could have nuked Afghanistan and Iraq into oblivion, as well as any upstarts like Iran or North Korea who would have chirped about it. Maybe, just maybe, there were political implications back home that prevented waging all-out war on obviously sentient beings that are absolutely no threat to us, and whose only crime is sitting on something valuable.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
In the movie, the humans never wanted to exterminate the inhabitants. They just wanted to mine unobtanium, and were likely just equipped for that. They hired mercenaries to protect the miners, but were not affiliated with any military, and thus unlikely to have access to weapons of mass destruction. I also doubt they were permitted to do much against the navi, and likely suffered legal consequences when they returned to Earth. That said, since it's obvious there'll be a sequel, the humans will be bombing the navi again for some contrived reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Unobtanium is a physics/engineering joke, and placeholder term for a material with highly desirable properties but doesn't actually exist.
Quite literally. I won't link to TVTropes, as we're already in enough of an economic slump as it is.
The first time I heard them say it in the film, I thought a draft of the script had mistakenly been used in the actual filming. It would be as though they'd said the Star Trek warp core ran on Phlebotinum, or any Indiana Jones movie called the Holy Grail / Pandora's Box / Chamber of Aliens "the McGuffin".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus H Christ. It's fiction. Fiction usually contains at least some fictional elements. The establishing premise of the story is that a mineral is discovered that is so valuable (a naturally occurring room temperature super-conductor) that it motivates humanity to undertake the incomprehensible expense of mounting an expedition to another star.
Did you hate the mystical golden glowing suitcase in Pulp Fiction too? It's called a MacGuffin, get
Re:Good (Score:4, Informative)
Your point is valid, but elements are one of the things we can experiment with fairly well here on Earth, and after a certain point atoms get too large to be stable and break apart almost immediately. Right now, some suspect that there may be some "islands of stability" out there on the periodic table, but after a certain point, while an element is possible, it usually breaks down in a very, very short period of time after creation because nuclear forces start becoming too weak to hold it all together.
So, point is, it's unlikely that an element we haven't heard of exists in large deposits on a terrestrial world. It would have decayed to other elements very quickly after formation, let alone surviving long enough to be part of planet formation.
On the other hand, no one said "unobtainium" needs to be a new element. It could be one of the newly discovered ones we have right now that they just nicknamed because it was very difficult to find or produce.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. Look up stuff like strange matter [wikipedia.org] and island of stability [wikipedia.org].
Also, I don't think we can actually calculate the stability of even the simplest elements, because the quantum mechanical equations describing atomic nucleus are just way too freaking complex. So, anything we haven't actually measured is just extrapolation from existing data.
So, from scientific perspective, science fiction is pretty free to add many different kinds of "unobtainium", it doesn't need much to make it scientifically plausible.
Re: (Score:3)
sci fi world with at least some effort at plausibility. (not all of it, but some details were there, for instance Jake suffering muscle weakness after prolonged time in the tank)
'Cause a culture capable of interstellar travel couldn't eliminate muscle weakness or fix nerve damage.
The reason the "indians" won was because the entire planet was a biological entity that could defend itself, by mobilizing all resources against the human invaders. It was never actually an underdog story : the planet has vastly superior technology and numbers to the human invaders (the brain transfers shown at the end of the movie were obviously extremely high tech), but the humans couldn't perceive it.
I remember writing that story in the early 90s and everyone who read it told me it was cliched back then. I seem to remember it was also a Star Trek episode in the 60s?
The best I can say about Avatar was that the last hour was really funny. I just wish we hadn't had to sit through the previous six hours to get there.
Re: (Score:3)
'Cause a culture capable of interstellar travel couldn't eliminate muscle weakness or fix nerve damage.
They could. Jake was going to get taken care of when he got back. If you remember, it was just a matter of cost. He couldn't afford it on his pension.
Re: (Score:2)
sci fi world with at least some effort at plausibility. (not all of it, but some details were there, for instance Jake suffering muscle weakness after prolonged time in the tank)
'Cause a culture capable of interstellar travel couldn't eliminate muscle weakness or fix nerve damage.
I've had minor nerve damage twice, no, we can't fix it, and we're not likely to figure out how anytime soon. All this brain-machine-interface crap is just that, literally two-bit crap - when compared to actual nerves containing hundreds of thousands of fibers.
If you want to kvetch about the tech in the movie, go after the Avatar link - as if lag, even light-speed lag, and other factors wouldn't make that wholly unworkable... I was also a little disappointed that they could make this magical link, and yet
Re: (Score:2)
'Cause a culture capable of splitting the atom and landing on the moon couldn't eliminate infectious diseases and cancer....
Re: (Score:2)
Look, I did not like Avatar. I am not being a snob though. My question was serious. What level of sophistication is even required to dislike Avatar?
Saying it does require sophistication is snobbery. I have liked maybe 5 of Cameron's movies in total. Those were Terminators, Aliens, and True Lies (which was just goofy).
You don't have to be sophisticated to dislike a movie. That was my point.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 - Sensible.
There is certain "herd logic" on /. that makes no sense to me, "Avatar Sucks!!!" being one.
It was over-hyped, and maybe too expensive to make, but I don't really care about that - I ignore the hype and if Hollywood wants to risk that kind of money, that's their business.
Looking at the end product of Avatar, its story, scientific accuracy and entertainment value were no worse than any number of "good" science fiction movies, it was a little too heavy on the Vietnam parallels for me, but what th
Re:Good (SPOILERS!) (Score:2)
Actually I only have a couple complaints with the tail end of the film.
#1: Norm
So Norm is out there fighting and he gets shot. We cut back to the science lab and Norm is crawling out of his linking device, clutching the area where he was shot. It's a, "I saw myself get shot! I'm dead! No, I'm not--my avatar is. Whew!" type of moment. Cut back to the air battle going on. Trudy has reached the end, her helicopter is shot up, and she says her emotional goodbye, "Sorry, Jake," just before a missile slam
Re: (Score:2)
These guys are Indians used to living in harmony with nature because on this planet, the "gods" they pray to are an actual tangible entity that controls nature. They aren't going to know military strategy either, to them, a frontal assault might make sense. In nature, when males vie for dominance, they usually make a lot of noise and "frontally assault" the other male.
And so the way the story goes, the natives are about to get slaughtered when it turns out that the "gods" the natives worship are not an in
Re: (Score:2)
I understand what you're saying, but I don't buy it.
You'd be 100% correct if the Indians were planning this themselves. However, they had Jake "Taruk Maqto" Sully in charge--a guy who knows all about the bad guys and their capabilities. This is their leader. So why didn't he suggest that the ground forces, say, try to take out a few of those tanks from a perch up in the trees? I mean, he's the man chosen by Eywa herself to lead them. You think he'd suggest the strategy but the dumb ignorant savages wou
Re: (Score:2)
"would you rather all movies were some low budget indie film that tries to "make a point" but it's hard to figure out what it is because the movie was made in someone's garage? "
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I just love the fact he took a famous chick-flick and turned it 3D so he could force a ton of guys out there to take women to see that movie all over again, at prices greater than the original ticket price. Although, in that situation there could be a silver lining.
Silver lining indeed! If that dude who bounces off the propeller in the original gets a little special treatment in the 3D version (including the curiously satisfying distant "PONGG!" sound when he hits it), it might just be worth the (inflated) ticket price.
Re:Godspeed! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Mr. Cranky Pants. There's no reason to keep going back to the peak of Everest, either. It's his money & his life, and if finds a new monster, he can call it Cameronzilla, and wouldn't you be all jealous that you don't have a supermonster named after you?
Who knows, maybe he will find something interesting. Slim chances, but we never really expected to find life in/on/around undersea volcanic vents, either.
Cheers!
Re: (Score:2)
one of the most, if not the most inhospitable place on the planet apart from Brierley hill.
Possibly the most esoteric regional reference I've ever seen on Slashdot, well played sir.
Re: (Score:2)