Jurassic Park or Avatar?

[Phil in the Blank]

I don't know that I'd say it's a problem of not having aged well. It's been pretty hip to hate the film since 2010. I remember some guys walking around my freshman dorm when it was out talking about it being "Live-Action Ferngully," and then me saying it was only about the twentieth time I'd heard that comment.

 

I was hating on it since 2009 - I was such a hipster.

 

But yes, nerd rage turned against it reasonably quickly. However just in general conversations I have with 'normal' people, I don't believe that Avatar has stood the test of time. I get the feeling that it was the fast-food of the movies. It hit the spot when you scoffed it down, but you quickly forgot you consumed it at all. And I put down that simply to the weak characters portrayed in the film. There was no meat there to keep your mind occupied once the visuals had stopped invading your brain.

[vc2002]

Overally, characters in Avatar were definitely weak, comparing to previous Cameron works, and that's my biggest complaint about the movie. Because of that, I dont think the film will age remarkably well. Films age well most likely because of memorable characters. But I dont think it will age pretty bad either because Pandora in the film was very fresh-blood vivid (in fact it's the biggest character in Avatar) and if anything Pandora is enough for the general audience to remember this film.

 

In fact, Pandora is the one of key reasons characters were weak. Like I've been saying all the time, when you have to spend over half of the time introducing the new world,  you just have no enough time left to take care of the characters. This is also the problem of A New Hope because it also got weak characters. Don't be mad at me saying that, but SW only got deeper in ESB (which is why a lot prefer it to ANH I guess).

Edited April 17, 2013 by vc2002

[filmscholar]

Steven probably could of directed "Avatar".  Cameron admitted he wouldn't of been able to capture the family aspect of "Jurassic Park" and it would of been way to violent.  "Jurassic Park" is just a better movie than "Avatar".  

[vc2002]

Steven probably could of directed "Avatar".  Cameron admitted he wouldn't of been able to capture the family aspect of "Jurassic Park" and it would of been way to violent.  "Jurassic Park" is just a better movie than "Avatar".  

 

Well, I suppose that according to ACCA, JP should have been R-rated.

[filmscholar]

Oh and for the record, I cared more about the well being of those "So called annoying" Kids than Jake Sulley cause Worthington acting was average. 

[Jessie]

Steven probably could of directed "Avatar". Cameron admitted he wouldn't of been able to capture the family aspect of "Jurassic Park" and it would of been way to violent. "Jurassic Park" is just a better movie than "Avatar".

In your opinion Edited April 17, 2013 by Jessie

[Moviedweeb]

I've got to say, I think Avatar is on a complete different level than JP. They are not even in the same league. JP is also far from Spielberg's best in my opinion. There is a reason many of the greatest director's call Avatar absolutely brilliant and original. Michael Mann even has it on his top 10 of all time. Scorsese, Tarantino, and even Spielberg have all gushed about it. One can say what they want about the film, but it was a groundbreaking cinematic event and a total watershed moment that could have only been created by a brilliant mind. So yea, Avatar. 

[Phil in the Blank]

 One can say what they want about the film, but it was a groundbreaking cinematic event and a total watershed moment that could have only been created by a brilliant mind. 

 

You know what, that exact quote could be used to describe Jurassic Park to a tee.

 

If you don't think it was a groundbreaking cinematic event and a total watershed moment in film then you are clearly young. Jurassic Park changed....everything and was such a momentous occasion. It changed the future of filmmaking. All Avatar managed to do was make it increasingly difficult for me to watch a film without paying a surcharge for the right to develop a headache while watching a film.

[Moviedweeb]

You know what, that exact quote could be used to describe Jurassic Park to a tee.

 

If you don't think it was a groundbreaking cinematic event and a total watershed moment in film then you are clearly young. Jurassic Park changed....everything and was such a momentous occasion. It changed the future of filmmaking. All Avatar managed to do was make it increasingly difficult for me to watch a film without paying a surcharge for the right to develop a headache while watching a film.

 

Of course it could have been, there are many great things I have to say about Avatar that can be said about JP as well. But I think Avatar was a larger achievement. The technology used in JP was also an extension of the work done on T2. That is not to take away from how great JP is, I just believe that Avatar was a more groundbreaking film. 

 

Edit: Also, I saw JP 3 times in theaters. You can disagree without saying things such as "you are clearly young." You should state your opinion based on what you feel and not as a way to diminish others. 

Edited April 22, 2013 by Clavius

[Phil in the Blank]

Of course it could have been, there are many great things I have to say about Avatar that can be said about JP as well. But I think Avatar was a larger achievement. The technology used in JP was also an extension of the work done on T2. That is not to take away from how great JP is, I just believe that Avatar was a more groundbreaking film. 

 

Edit: Also, I saw JP 3 times in theaters. You can disagree without saying things such as "you are clearly young." You should state your opinion based on what you feel and not as a way to diminish others. 

 

 

 

I love T2. T2 is an amazing film and the CGI was used to excellent effect in that movie. But comparing the CGI from T2 to Jurassic Park it is really not even close. Using CGI to make some metal objects and a few other miscellaneous effects pales into comparison of what was achieved with Jurassic Park. To create living, breathing, realistic animals to appear seamlessly on the screen was so far in-front of anything that had came before its not even funny.

 

To quote from the Book Blockbuster: How Hollywood Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Summer

 

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HMOHsjIb5cC&pg=PA218#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

From a test screening of a full-size T-rex

 

"It was like one of those moments in history, like the invention of the light bulb or the first telephone call," Lucas said. "A major gap had been crossed, and things were never going to be the same." Spielberg found himself consoling model-maker Tippett. "There we were watching our future unfolding on the TV screen, so authentic I couldn't believe my eyes. It blew my mind," says Spielberg. "I turned to Phil, and Phil looked at me and Phil said, 'I think I'm extinct.'  "

 

Jurassic Park changed film-making for ever. Now with CGI, if you could imagine it, you could film it. It ended careers in more traditional effects. Avatar brought us 3D, which we have had kicking around in various forms for 50+ years. It gave us a different (i'm not going to say 'better') way to consume the same movie. JP changed the way movies were made.

 

I can see why some people prefer Avatar to JP as a movie. I can't understand why any body would think Avatar was the more influential. It's not even close IMO.

 

p.s. Sorry Sorry Sorry, My apologies. Clearly you have Alzheimer's rather than being too young! I feel terrible for mis-diagnosing you.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Phil in the Darkness

[RobinHood26]

^best post ever. And thank you for that fantastic read. 

[vc2002]

I love T2. T2 is an amazing film and the CGI was used to excellent effect in that movie. But comparing the CGI from T2 to Jurassic Park it is really not even close. Using CGI to make some metal objects and a few other miscellaneous effects pales into comparison of what was achieved with Jurassic Park. To create living, breathing, realistic animals to appear seamlessly on the screen was so far in-front of anything that had came before its not even funny.

 

To quote from the Book Blockbuster: How Hollywood Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Summer

 

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HMOHsjIb5cC&pg=PA218#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

From a test screening of a full-size T-rex

 

"It was like one of those moments in history, like the invention of the light bulb or the first telephone call," Lucas said. "A major gap had been crossed, and things were never going to be the same." Spielberg found himself consoling model-maker Tippett. "There we were watching our future unfolding on the TV screen, so authentic I couldn't believe my eyes. It blew my mind," says Spielberg. "I turned to Phil, and Phil looked at me and Phil said, 'I think I'm extinct.'  "

 

Jurassic Park changed film-making for ever. Now with CGI, if you could imagine it, you could film it. It ended careers in more traditional effects. Avatar brought us 3D, which we have had kicking around in various forms for 50+ years. It gave us a different (i'm not going to say 'better') way to consume the same movie. JP changed the way movies were made.

 

I can see why some people prefer Avatar to JP as a movie. I can't understand why any body would think Avatar was the more influential. It's not even close IMO.

 

p.s. Sorry Sorry Sorry, My apologies. Clearly you have Alzheimer's rather than being too young! I feel terrible for mis-diagnosing you.

 

Comparing the influence of both is kinda pointless at this moment. JP has been out for two decades and it followed by two sequels. Avatar has only been known for 3 years. We need to at least wait another ten years or so to have a fair judgement.

 

But I agree that JP had a bigger impact on the industry than T2 in terms of the evolution of visual effects. T2 is, I think, a big step forward from The Abyss. However, JP could never be the same without T2. T2 basically set the standard of how CG should co-exist with practicall effects before the post-CG era. At that time, CG was quite expensive and it could only be used on carefully selected scenes. So, how to combine a lot of practical effects with a small amount of CGI seeminglessly suggested a big challenge, and T2 basically set the standard of how it should be done.

[Ozymandias]

I love T2. T2 is an amazing film and the CGI was used to excellent effect in that movie. But comparing the CGI from T2 to Jurassic Park it is really not even close. Using CGI to make some metal objects and a few other miscellaneous effects pales into comparison of what was achieved with Jurassic Park. To create living, breathing, realistic animals to appear seamlessly on the screen was so far in-front of anything that had came before its not even funny.

 

To quote from the Book Blockbuster: How Hollywood Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Summer

 

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HMOHsjIb5cC&pg=PA218#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

From a test screening of a full-size T-rex

 

"It was like one of those moments in history, like the invention of the light bulb or the first telephone call," Lucas said. "A major gap had been crossed, and things were never going to be the same." Spielberg found himself consoling model-maker Tippett. "There we were watching our future unfolding on the TV screen, so authentic I couldn't believe my eyes. It blew my mind," says Spielberg. "I turned to Phil, and Phil looked at me and Phil said, 'I think I'm extinct.'  "

 

Jurassic Park changed film-making for ever. Now with CGI, if you could imagine it, you could film it. It ended careers in more traditional effects. Avatar brought us 3D, which we have had kicking around in various forms for 50+ years. It gave us a different (i'm not going to say 'better') way to consume the same movie. JP changed the way movies were made.

 

I can see why some people prefer Avatar to JP as a movie. I can't understand why any body would think Avatar was the more influential. It's not even close IMO.

 

The only significant influence I can see Avatar ever truly having is depending on where 3D ends up.  Will it continue to slowly die?  Will another film come along and revive it?  Either way, I can never see 3D ever becoming more than a mere option so it at best will be minimal.  One thing is for sure, its never, ever going to completely take over like color did to black and white like James Cameron hilariously predicted.

 

Great post btw.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Shpongle

[Phil in the Blank]

Comparing the influence of both is kinda pointless at this moment. JP has been out for two decades and it followed by two sequels. Avatar has only been known for 3 years. We need to at least wait another ten years or so to have a fair judgement.

 

But I agree that JP had a bigger impact on the industry than T2 in terms of the evolution of visual effects. T2 is, I think, a big step forward from The Abyss. However, JP could never be the same without T2. T2 basically set the standard of how CG should co-exist with practicall effects before the post-CG era. At that time, CG was quite expensive and it could only be used on carefully selected scenes. So, how to combine a lot of practical effects with a small amount of CGI seeminglessly suggested a big challenge, and T2 basically set the standard of how it should be done.

 

I think after 3 years we can tell that the 3D introduced by Avatar is not going to change cinema fundamentally. 

 

And I agree T2 was a decent step forward from The Abyss but JP was the game changer. JP had to deal with limited technology too if you remember. It's why there is only about 5 minutes of CGI in a film of 2 hours - hard to believe that the CGI game-changer had so little CGI in it really. Watching JP recently though reminded me at just how realistic that CGI was and despite the 16 years of evolution between it's release and Avatar's the CGI dinosaurs in JP felt as believable to me as any CGI creature in Avatar. A truly remarkable feat given the technology that was available at the time.

 

Finally compare

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR_ETB58fy8

 

vs

 

 

IMO, it was just on a different level to T2. And that's not to knock T2.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Phil in the Darkness

[RobinHood26]

BOOM!

[Jessie]

Avatar is an example of what happens when you use all the film making tricks that have been developed over time like mo-cap etc and use them to make a superb VFX film. I don't think Avatar was more of a break through than JP but that's because this is the future, its easier to have a breakthrough in VFX 16 years ago than it is now. Avatar so far though has left a larger foot print in cinema. Its been 3 years since the release of Avatar and just about every blockbuster out there is in 3D. Also it's not like there haven't been movies trying to copy Avatar's landscape. The two highest grossing movies of this year so far are 2 examples. Oz and The Croods had quite clearly used Avatar as their basis in creating some of the settings in their films. 

 

Personally I don't think either movies are masterpieces but I prefer Avatar simply because it had more imagination. Creating all of Pandora out of sheer imagination is far more impressive than creating Dinosaurs in which we already new what they looked like, but that's just my opinion.

[Phil in the Blank]

If I go watch Iron Man 3 in 3D I am not getting a significantly different experience then watching it in 2D. Its fundamentally the same movie. Now imagine if they made an Iron Man 3 without CGI and a version of Iron Man 3 with CGI. Those would be two fundamentally different movies because some things simply could not be achieved without CGI. That is why I say that JP was the more influential. Before that movie, CG was more or less a gimmick, after JP your imagination was more or less the limit of what could be put up on the screen.

 

As for Avatar, IMO while Pandora was very imaginative the movie itself was very very predictable. I remember sitting in that theatre and correctly guessing time after time what was going to be happening 5 minutes from now. It was a very formulaic and in that sense a very unimaginative movie where it counts - the screenplay. Jurassic Park, while it may be fair to say is basically a weaker, more visually impressive version of Jaws, still has that element of 'I don't know what's going to happen next'. I assumed that the children and grant were safe, and probably the chick too - but the rest were up for grabs.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Phil in the Darkness

[lab276]

I think after 3 years we can tell that the 3D introduced by Avatar is not going to change cinema fundamentally. And I agree T2 was a decent step forward from The Abyss but JP was the game changer. JP had to deal with limited technology too if you remember. It's why there is only about 5 minutes of CGI in a film of 2 hours - hard to believe that the CGI game-changer had so little CGI in it really. Watching JP recently though reminded me at just how realistic that CGI was and despite the 16 years of evolution between it's release and Avatar's the CGI dinosaurs in JP felt as believable to me as any CGI creature in Avatar. A truly remarkable feat given the technology that was available at the time.

Having little CG stuff in the film is its avantage, they've got fewer opportunities to fuck it up.

[Moviedweeb]

I love T2. T2 is an amazing film and the CGI was used to excellent effect in that movie. But comparing the CGI from T2 to Jurassic Park it is really not even close. Using CGI to make some metal objects and a few other miscellaneous effects pales into comparison of what was achieved with Jurassic Park. To create living, breathing, realistic animals to appear seamlessly on the screen was so far in-front of anything that had came before its not even funny.

 

To quote from the Book Blockbuster: How Hollywood Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Summer

 

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HMOHsjIb5cC&pg=PA218#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

From a test screening of a full-size T-rex

 

"It was like one of those moments in history, like the invention of the light bulb or the first telephone call," Lucas said. "A major gap had been crossed, and things were never going to be the same." Spielberg found himself consoling model-maker Tippett. "There we were watching our future unfolding on the TV screen, so authentic I couldn't believe my eyes. It blew my mind," says Spielberg. "I turned to Phil, and Phil looked at me and Phil said, 'I think I'm extinct.'  "

 

Jurassic Park changed film-making for ever. Now with CGI, if you could imagine it, you could film it. It ended careers in more traditional effects. Avatar brought us 3D, which we have had kicking around in various forms for 50+ years. It gave us a different (i'm not going to say 'better') way to consume the same movie. JP changed the way movies were made.

 

I can see why some people prefer Avatar to JP as a movie. I can't understand why any body would think Avatar was the more influential. It's not even close IMO.

 

p.s. Sorry Sorry Sorry, My apologies. Clearly you have Alzheimer's rather than being too young! I feel terrible for mis-diagnosing you.

 

Jurassic Park was a monumental achievement. Both Avatar and JP stood on the shoulders of the amazing work that proceeded them (JP with T2, Avatar with LOTR etc..) but I believe that Avatar was more of a watershed moment. Again, this is just my opinion and, no, I don't have Alzheimer's lol. I am just a guy who likes to discuss movies.

 

Again, these are all opinions but here is a quote from Dennis Muren (taken from No Fate but What You Make: T2 and the Rise of DIgital Effects; 2003)

 

"To me the biggest breakthrough was when we did Terminator 2 that just opened the door for Jurassic and all of the others and that was as big as when we did motion control on Star Wars. But I don't see another big thing coming."

 

I really do believe that T2 was the breakthrough, JP just took it to a whole other level which was a gigantic achievement as well. And I also think that Avatar was the big thing that came afterwards. His quote was from 2003. 

Edited April 22, 2013 by Clavius

[dashrendar44]

That's why Avatar and JP are just more of the same relative to their eras even in terms of VFX breathroughs. Both were standing on the shoulders of other breakthrough movies and took it to the next level (JP on T2 shoulders for CGI achievements how to blend seemlessly CGI creature creations into live action; Avatar on LOTR and King Kong shoulders for their achievements in creating photo-realistic CGI humanoid alien creatures emoting human feelings with PerfCap techology).

 

In Avatar, JP's advancement in CGI creatures is just now a common fraction of the whole brand technology used in the movie. WETA took it to the next level. Their lightning crew is just out of this world. Avatar is one of the only movie where the CGI are more photo-realistic in broad daylight than night settings. (The rule in computer imagery is the darker the setting is, the more you can make CGI look good and hide the flaws due to the general obscurity).

Edited April 22, 2013 by dashrendar44