<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thoughts on &#8220;Avatar&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thomaswebb.net/2010/01/23/thoughts-on-avatar/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thomaswebb.net/2010/01/23/thoughts-on-avatar/</link>
	<description>Human ecology, human action and human nature</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:54:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: michael</title>
		<link>http://thomaswebb.net/2010/01/23/thoughts-on-avatar/comment-page-1/#comment-1342</link>
		<dc:creator>michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:32:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomaswebb.net/?p=740#comment-1342</guid>
		<description>I saw it a few weeks ago and was really surprised...it wasn&#039;t at all what I expected it to be. I sort of expected more sci-fi elements...but to me the storyline was like a movie based on a video game....instead of the other way around. And the video game it would have been based on is like most of the newer games that come out now...all graphics, little character or story or play value (except for the wii....wii is awesome!).
 
can&#039;t wait to see a miike takashi movie in 3d.

and ya...miyazaki is pretty amazing...but I think 3/5 of the goodness of his movies comes from Joe Hisaishi!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw it a few weeks ago and was really surprised&#8230;it wasn&#8217;t at all what I expected it to be. I sort of expected more sci-fi elements&#8230;but to me the storyline was like a movie based on a video game&#8230;.instead of the other way around. And the video game it would have been based on is like most of the newer games that come out now&#8230;all graphics, little character or story or play value (except for the wii&#8230;.wii is awesome!).</p>
<p>can&#8217;t wait to see a miike takashi movie in 3d.</p>
<p>and ya&#8230;miyazaki is pretty amazing&#8230;but I think 3/5 of the goodness of his movies comes from Joe Hisaishi!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kaela</title>
		<link>http://thomaswebb.net/2010/01/23/thoughts-on-avatar/comment-page-1/#comment-1338</link>
		<dc:creator>Kaela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 05:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomaswebb.net/?p=740#comment-1338</guid>
		<description>This is very similar to the impression I had of this movie!
I liked the visual effects (I think you had to sit all the way in the back to avoid the dizziness problem, but I get dizzy easily too).
But I actually liked Ferngully&#039;s view on the whole Nature thing better (mostly because it wasn&#039;t religious, but it did point out that machines are gross and messy and nature is inherently beautiful to us humans).
I think that it is a clear example of Sci-Fi written without a scientist involved, which always makes for poor sci-fi for the intellectual audience, but a box-office smash for the rest of their audience.
I really liked the idea of the creatures being connected the way they were, and I think that since humans are a bunch of weird things cooperating, even down to our gut flora, I think the idea is a good one that should have been made less &quot;hoaky&quot; in it&#039;s implementation (though it might have lost the main stream audience if it was explained in an exciting sciency way).
I completely agree that Miyazaki has a much more realistic and &quot;soulful&quot; interpretation of Nature. It&#039;s a good example how Avatar represents the Western idea of Nature, and Miyazaki represents the Japanese, which I think is a much more useful and inspiring way to look at it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is very similar to the impression I had of this movie!<br />
I liked the visual effects (I think you had to sit all the way in the back to avoid the dizziness problem, but I get dizzy easily too).<br />
But I actually liked Ferngully&#8217;s view on the whole Nature thing better (mostly because it wasn&#8217;t religious, but it did point out that machines are gross and messy and nature is inherently beautiful to us humans).<br />
I think that it is a clear example of Sci-Fi written without a scientist involved, which always makes for poor sci-fi for the intellectual audience, but a box-office smash for the rest of their audience.<br />
I really liked the idea of the creatures being connected the way they were, and I think that since humans are a bunch of weird things cooperating, even down to our gut flora, I think the idea is a good one that should have been made less &#8220;hoaky&#8221; in it&#8217;s implementation (though it might have lost the main stream audience if it was explained in an exciting sciency way).<br />
I completely agree that Miyazaki has a much more realistic and &#8220;soulful&#8221; interpretation of Nature. It&#8217;s a good example how Avatar represents the Western idea of Nature, and Miyazaki represents the Japanese, which I think is a much more useful and inspiring way to look at it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

