4 ms·

Egan gets your point entirely, and laments that it hasn't been put in service of something better. The best technology in the world deserves to be joined with a

by emmett 17y ago

Egan gets your point entirely, and laments that it hasn't been put in service of something better. The best technology in the world deserves to be joined with a great script, not a severely impaired one.

akkartik 17y ago
An awesome example of script+effects: Who Framed Roger Rabbit
mwerty 17y ago
and non-cringeworthy dialogues.
ars 17y ago
All new technologies are first paired with non-risky material. So they use a non-risky script, with nothing objectionable in it. Once the technology matures you can use a better script. The price of better is that sometimes it's worse, that's why it's a risk. If it was a sure thing everyone would do it, but it's not easy to create something great. You can try, and sometimes you'll make it, and other times you'll flop. Which is too much of a risk for a new technology - better to have something good enough, with little risk. Remember: Everyone thinks what they are doing is great. But if you are wrong, and it's a flagship product you are doomed. For example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Gate_(film) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Gate_(film)
- hugh_ 17y ago
  So they use a non-risky script, with nothing objectionable in it. How did we get to the point where "Humans are evil, kill them all!" is a non-risky script with nothing objectionable in it?
  - gnaritas 17y ago
    Because it wasn't a humans are evil, kill them all plot, it was a standard corporations are evil and stupid and scientists are good and help the natives plot. Humans were the good guys here as well as the bad.
- Daniel_Newby 17y ago
  That would be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_%28film%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_%28film%29 Joe Valdez at This Distracted Globe has a good review: http://thisdistractedglobe.com/2009/01/01/heavens-gate/ http://thisdistractedglobe.com/2009/01/01/heavens-gate/ TL;DR version: quit perfecting and ship it!
- anatoly 17y ago
  Why are you repeating the points Egan already made as though they were novel? He says in his review the same things as you're saying. "Sometime in the next twenty years or so, the technology that enabled Avatar will become cheap enough to risk employing alongside a moderately intelligent script." - it's right there in the review. It's frustrating when this happens: Author: A, yet also B. You may think that C, but I'd argue that D makes that untenable. Commenter: He said A, but clearly C. Another commenter: Hmm, C you say? But what about D? Another commenter: y'all are too swept up in your As and Cs and Ds, have you even stopped to consider B?
  - cousin_it 17y ago
    Digression: I felt this comment of yours sounded much more natural than the Russian translation you posted on your blog, even though you're a native Russian speaker. And people still ask me why I prefer to make complex arguments in English!

by emmett 17y ago

akkartik 17y ago

An awesome example of script+effects: Who Framed Roger Rabbit

mwerty 17y ago

and non-cringeworthy dialogues.

ars 17y ago

All new technologies are first paired with non-risky material. So they use a non-risky script, with nothing objectionable in it. Once the technology matures you can use a better script. The price of better is that sometimes it's worse, that's why it's a risk. If it was a sure thing everyone would do it, but it's not easy to create something great. You can try, and sometimes you'll make it, and other times you'll flop. Which is too much of a risk for a new technology - better to have something good enough, with little risk. Remember: Everyone thinks what they are doing is great. But if you are wrong, and it's a flagship product you are doomed. For example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Gate_(film) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavens_Gate_(film)

hugh_ 17y ago
So they use a non-risky script, with nothing objectionable in it. How did we get to the point where "Humans are evil, kill them all!" is a non-risky script with nothing objectionable in it?
- gnaritas 17y ago
  Because it wasn't a humans are evil, kill them all plot, it was a standard corporations are evil and stupid and scientists are good and help the natives plot. Humans were the good guys here as well as the bad.
Daniel_Newby 17y ago
That would be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_%28film%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_%28film%29 Joe Valdez at This Distracted Globe has a good review: http://thisdistractedglobe.com/2009/01/01/heavens-gate/ http://thisdistractedglobe.com/2009/01/01/heavens-gate/ TL;DR version: quit perfecting and ship it!
anatoly 17y ago
Why are you repeating the points Egan already made as though they were novel? He says in his review the same things as you're saying. "Sometime in the next twenty years or so, the technology that enabled Avatar will become cheap enough to risk employing alongside a moderately intelligent script." - it's right there in the review. It's frustrating when this happens: Author: A, yet also B. You may think that C, but I'd argue that D makes that untenable. Commenter: He said A, but clearly C. Another commenter: Hmm, C you say? But what about D? Another commenter: y'all are too swept up in your As and Cs and Ds, have you even stopped to consider B?
- cousin_it 17y ago
  Digression: I felt this comment of yours sounded much more natural than the Russian translation you posted on your blog, even though you're a native Russian speaker. And people still ask me why I prefer to make complex arguments in English!