47

I’ve wanted to write this review for ages, but yours is excellent so I’m happy as it is. I absolutely loved the film; I watched it during a summer movie night at the conservatory in Milan, after a string quartet played psychedelic Beatles. By halfway through the film, the audience had halved, and a couple of people took advantage of the warm evening air to catch some sleep. I found it exceptional (in the sense of being an "exception" compared to a lot of contemporary cinema, I would never have expected it to be like this), and I don’t think it’s cold; the acting is fantastic, and Dylan’s music comes to life like in very few other "musical" films. (I had also just seen Across the Universe, which had me buzzing). I'm sure Dylan (or at least one of the 7) liked the film as much as I did.

I mean, worse than Parnassus? Damn..

I really enjoyed "dub housing," while "new picnic time" a bit less. Yes, I find that one a bit challenging. I would obviously be eternally grateful to anyone who can give me some info about the box set (for example, where the hell can I find it). The review is very nice, although I can't say anything about the record (I can't find it anywhere...).

I don't think I'll be able to make it to Lugano, but beautiful, vibes, and photos.

I believe I have little to add to Stoney's comment. Furthermore, I think this is also my first comment on one of your writings. It's pointless to say that your continuous play between the particular and the universal is an analytical method so "naked" that it discourages anyone from defining you as an "exponent of moderate thought"; I see no analytical knot untied, but only clever and biased end goals. For instance, take the discussion of a universal and abstract "procedural reality," which, in the absolutism you apply, loses its real value when, by focusing on acts and facts, it provides precise, or at least readable, indications. You instead hide behind the trick of trying to extract reality from procedural acts, when in fact the correct procedure (even if you want to refute those acts) would be the opposite.

s4doll: in terms of video games and sci-fi, you're almost encyclopedic (I only go back one generation), and you’re right about what you say, but I basically wanted to point out that cinema, since Matrix (more or less), has increasingly leaned towards a video game style in action scenes and beyond; I see 3D as a step towards seeking greater (physical) participation from the viewer. Avatar, more than a story, is a scenario in which the viewer is completely immersed, like in a kind of virtual reality (or video game, indeed!). That said, I’m going back to studying, cheers :)

I forgot to mention that paradoxically, beyond what I've written, I actually relatively liked the film, even though it's absolutely "American" (it shares the style that characterizes the blockbusters of various Bay, Sommers & co. WITH THE NECESSARY QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES) - in practice, the setup of the direction and mise-en-scène, the editing of the various sequences, the rhythm of the dialogues, etc. Here (in Avatar) everything has a greater underlying depth (the target of the latest Hollywood productions is definitely geared towards early childhood) and above all, a realization that is light-years ahead of all other products in the same genre. I only complain about the repeated moments of embarrassment caused by seeing the same ideas (I'm talking about plot and screenplay) and the same exact characters in the same situations seen a trillion times. And the fact that it's a completely harmless film, light as air, reduced to a soft lump that can be chewed by everyone.

"Well, what is this avatar?" a new-age meatloaf, (interconnection of living beings with Mother Nature, panistic religiosity, basically the neo-smurfs) the fair of maximalism. Not satisfied with the special effects of digital bulimia, Cameron has crammed in everything, from the theme of terrorism to the condemnation of the war in Iraq (the indigenous people sit on a very expensive mineral, and the Marines are willing to do anything to make them vacate) to a mishmash that grinds centuries of entertainment cinema. (And here I would refer to Larrock's post on entertainment) And now cinema is increasingly becoming a video game, just missing the interaction: it's no coincidence that everything is in three dimensions, and the aesthetics drawing from Halo, (especially for the colors of the vegetation and various aliens, and then for terrestrial vehicles that are identical to those in the game) Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, and Panzer Dragoon Orta. (An old Xbox game whose random sequence is identical to all those scenes in the movie where the indigenous fly on the backs of dragons) As for the script, we're really at video game level. Ah, and let’s put an end to the revived Weaver playing the tough scientist just to give a nod to Alien, but especially with Michelle Rodriguez doomed to always play the exact same role...

Absolutely agree on Dirty Pool, that alone is worth a 5 :)

@s4doll: I understand, and I have to say I've unfortunately realized it as well.. I even find myself watching the killcam and noticing that my character hadn't even started shooting, while in-game I would have bet on getting the kill in my favor. Moreover, since you host unknowingly, if you exit the match for various reasons, it collapses the match for the other 11 players (and this happens about 50% of the time, with peaks during sessions when you can barely manage to play a full match..) I don't think it will be sidelined any time soon, at least on console. I've also heard that on 360, they have their nice dedicated servers; but they're also the only ones who pay to play a few matches online..